Starting from Sperber and Mercier’s theory (2011) on the relationship between reasoning and arguing, we will try to rethink the link between rhetoric and argumentation. Using Aristotelian rhetoric as a theoretical framework, we will focus on two related features: 1) the nature and the role of argumentation inferences in classical models of rhetoric; 2) the role of normativity in assessing a naturalistic description of what we make when we argue.
Di Piazza Salvatore, P.F. (2018). Are Humans Poor at Arguing? From the ‘Argumentative Theory of Reasoning’ back to a Rhetorical Theory of Argumentation. In Argumentation and Inference: Proceedings of the 2nd European Conference on Argumentation, Fribourg 2017 (pp. 247-261). Londra : College Publications.
Are Humans Poor at Arguing? From the ‘Argumentative Theory of Reasoning’ back to a Rhetorical Theory of Argumentation
Di Piazza Salvatore;Piazza Francesca;
2018-01-01
Abstract
Starting from Sperber and Mercier’s theory (2011) on the relationship between reasoning and arguing, we will try to rethink the link between rhetoric and argumentation. Using Aristotelian rhetoric as a theoretical framework, we will focus on two related features: 1) the nature and the role of argumentation inferences in classical models of rhetoric; 2) the role of normativity in assessing a naturalistic description of what we make when we argue.
| File | Dimensione | Formato | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
ECA2017Proceedings-DiPiazza et al_PUBBLICATO.pdf
Solo gestori archvio
Dimensione
437.21 kB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
437.21 kB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri Richiedi una copia |
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
