Reconstructing Argumentative Discourse title: Studies in Rhetoric and Communication author: Eemeren, F. H. van. publisher: University of Alabama Press isbn10 | asin: 0817306978 print isbn13: 9780817306977 ebook isbn13: 9780585188720 language: English Persuasion (Rhetoric) , Discourse analysis, subject Speech acts (Linguistics) publication date: 1993 lcc: P301.5.P47R43 1993eb ddc: 808 Persuasion (Rhetoric) , Discourse analysis, subject: Speech acts (Linguistics) Page i Reconstructing Argumentative Discourse Page ii STUDIES IN RHETORIC AND COMMUNICATION General Editors: E. Culpepper Clark Raymie E. McKerrow David Zarefsky Page iii Reconstructing Argumentative Discourse Frans H. van Eemeren, Rob Grootendorst Sally Jackson, and Scott Jacobs The University of Alabama Press Tuscaloosa and London Page iv Copyright © 1993 The University of Alabama Press Tuscaloosa, Alabama 35487-0380 All rights reserved Manufactured in the United States of America The paper on which this book is printed meets the minimum requirements of American National Standard for Information Science- Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ANSI Z39.48- 1984. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Reconstructing argumentative discourse / Frans H. van Eemeren ... [et al.]. p. cm.(Studies in rhetoric and communication) Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0-8173-0697-8 1. Persuasion (Rhetoric) 2. Discourse analysis. 3. Speech acts (Linguistics) I. Eemeren, F. H. van. II. Series. P301.5.P47R43 1993 808dc20 93-18082 British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data available Page v Contents Preface vii 1. Reconciling Descriptive and Normative Insights 1 Speech Act Rules Interactional Principles of Cooperation and Alignment Four Core Commitments in the Study of Argumentation Speech Acts and the Four Core Commitments 2. A Starting Point for Normative Description 20 Five Components of the Study of Argumentation An Ideal Model of Argumentative Discourse Higher-Order Conditions Ideal Model and Actual Practice 3. Principles and Procedures for Normative Reconstruction 37 Normative Reconstruction Interpretive Problems in Reconstruction Approaches to Analysis and Reconstruction 4. Dialectical Reconstruction 60 Reconstruction Transformations An Extended Example The Analytic Overview Page vi 5. The Pragmatic Organization of Conversational 91 Argument Normative and Naive Reconstruction Virtual Standpoints and Disagreement Space Hierarchical Organization of Standpoints Felicity Conditions and "Issue Structure" in Argumentation Case Study: Responses to an Editorial Opinion Conclusions 6. Mediation as Critical Discussion 117 Third-Party Dispute Mediation Engineering Solutions in Discourse Conclusions 7. Failures in Higher-Order Conditions in the Organization142 of Witnessing and Heckling Episodes Fields of Argumentation Witnessing and Heckling Standpoints and Perspectives Reflexive Structuring of Confrontation Conclusions 8. Directions for Elaboration of the Model 170 Implications for Philosophical Concepts of Reasonableness Implications for Normative Models Implications for Analytic Methods Implications for Empirical Description Implications for Practical Research References 185 Index 193 Page vii Preface In contemporary argumentation research, there is an unfortunate division between descriptive and critical work. Those approaching argumentation theory from a social scientific perspective tend to think of their work as "descriptive," and those approaching argumentation theory from humanistic perspectives such as logic and rhetoric tend to think of their work as "normative" or ''critical." Social scientific approaches generally claim to be value-free. They generally portray themselves as avoiding questions of how individuals in principle should and should not argue in favor of simply asking how individuals in fact do and do not argue. In contrast, critical approaches are often more concerned with the properties of models of ideal argumentation than with features of actual argumentative practice. They tend to emphasize questions of how, ideally, individuals should and should not argue, seeming to be generally uninterested in questions of how individuals in fact do and do not argue. Those on each side of the divide seem to regard the other side as so different in purpose and approach as to be irrelevant to their own concerns. Standing between these two approaches, we see much to be gained from a recognition of the relationship between descriptive and normative theory and much to be gained from their reconciliation within a program of detailed empirical analysis. To get a sense of what we have in mind, consider an excerpt from Senator Edward Kennedy's nationally televised "Address to the Page viii People of Massachusetts" on July 25, 1969. In the speech, the senator gives an account of his involvement in the drowning death of Mary Jo Kopechne. What is noticed as important about this text would likely depend heavily on whether a descriptive or a critical approach is taken. A descriptive approach would likely focus on the pragmatic structur- Example 0.1 01On Chappaquiddick Island, off Martha's Vineyard, I attended 02on Friday evening, July 18, a cookout I had encouraged and 03helped sponsor for a devoted group of Kennedy campaign 04secretaries. When I left the party, around 11:15 , I P.M. 05was accompanied by one of these girls, Miss Mary Jo 06Kopechne. Mary Jo was one of the most devoted members of 07the staff of Senator Robert Kennedy. She worked for him for 08four years and was broken up over his death. For this 09reason, and because she was such a gentle, kind, and 10idealistic person, all of us tried to help her feel that she 11still had a home with the Kennedy family. There is no 12truth, no truth whatever, to the widely circulated 13suspicions of immoral conduct that have been leveled at