Bart Garssen

Bart Garssen
University of Amsterdam | UVA · Department of Linguistics

About

94
Publications
8,417
Reads
How we measure 'reads'
A 'read' is counted each time someone views a publication summary (such as the title, abstract, and list of authors), clicks on a figure, or views or downloads the full-text. Learn more
1,050
Citations
Citations since 2017
8 Research Items
635 Citations
2017201820192020202120222023020406080100120
2017201820192020202120222023020406080100120
2017201820192020202120222023020406080100120
2017201820192020202120222023020406080100120

Publications

Publications (94)
Chapter
In From argument schemes to argumentative relations in the wild we have brought together a variety of contributions to argumentation theory that we want to bring to the attention of the international community of argumentation scholars and students of argumentation.
Chapter
In the last two decades various theoretically-oriented publications have appeared about argument schemes.
Book
This volume comprises a selection of contributions to the theorizing about argumentation that have been presented at the 9th conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation (ISSA), held in Amsterdam in July 2018. The chapters included provide a general theoretical perspective on central topics in argumentation theory, such a...
Article
Full-text available
The aim of this paper is to describe the way in which argumentative patterns come into being in plenary debate over legislative issues in the European Parliament. What kind of argumentative patterns are to be expected within this macro context? It is shown that the argumentative patterns that come into being in legislative debate in the European Pa...
Chapter
Threatening the other discussion party with negative, unpleasant consequences—for instance, by threatening him with physical violence or (more subtly) by threatening him implicitly with sanctions—if that party is not willing to refrain from advancing a particular standpoint or from casting doubt on a particular standpoint, is an outspoken example o...
Article
In the pragma-dialectical theory of argumentation fallacies are defined as violations of rules for critical discussion that further the resolution of differences of opinion on the merits. Viewed within this perspective, fallacies are wrong discussion moves. Such moves can occur in every stage of the resolution process and they can be made by both p...
Chapter
In this chapter van Eemeren, Garssen and Meuffels explore the possibilities of effectiveness research within the pragma-dialectical framework of argumentation. The introduction of the concept of strategic maneuvering into the pragma-dialectical theory makes it possible to formulate testable hypotheses regarding the persuasiveness of argumentative m...
Chapter
Against the background of the standard pragma-dialectical theory, some fifteen years ago Van Eemeren en Houtlosser set about to extend the available analytic and evaluative tools by introducing the notion of ‘strategic maneuvering’ (van Eemeren and Houtlosser in Dialectic and rhetoric: the warp and woof of argumentation analysis. Kluwer Academic, D...
Chapter
According to van Eemeren (Strategic maneuvering in argumentative discourse. Extending the pragma-dialectical theory of argumentation. John Benjamins, Amsterdam, 2010), the participants in argumentative discourse are in the predicament of having to reach the results that are the most advantageous from their points of view while remaining within the...
Article
The disguised ad baculum fallacy empirically investigated In argumentative discourse fallacies occur regularly. They often seem not to be noticed by the participants in the discourse. This also goes for the ad baculum fallacy. Threatening the other party with unpleasant consequences if that party doesn’t retract his standpoint is generally consider...
Chapter
The study of argumentation is often considered to be part of the discipline called logic, more in particular of informal logic. In our contribution we would like to make clear that the study of argumentation can also be constructively viewed as being part of pragmatics, more in particular of normative pragmatics. In doing so we start from the theor...
Chapter
As a consequence of the institutional preconditions applying to the strategic manoeuvring taking place in specific communicative activity types, certain context-dependent argumentative patterns of argument schemes and argumentation structures can be observed in argumentative discourse. Pragma-dialecticians are interested in discovering these patter...
Article
As a consequence of the institutional preconditions applying to the strategic manoeuvring taking place in specific communicative activity types, certain context-dependent argumentative patterns of standpoints, argument schemes and argumentation structures can be observed in argumentative discourse. Pragma-dialecticians are interested in discovering...
Chapter
This chapter discusses developments which have taken place, more or less independently, outside the research traditions treated in the earlier chapters. First, attention is paid to research in some disciplines and research programs that connect with argumentation theory and may even have some overlap with it. In Sect. 12.2 critical discourse analys...
Book
The Handbook Argumentation Theory provides an up to date survey of the various theoretical contributions to the development of argumentation theory for all scholars interested in argumentation, informal logic and rhetoric. It describes the historical roots of modern argumentation theory that are still an important theoretical background to contempo...
Article
This paper focuses on argumentation the institutional context of debate in the European Parliament. A parliamentary debate is a distinct argumentative activity type. In the pragma-dialectical approach, argumentative activity types are defined as conventionalized argumentative practices in which the possibilities for strategic maneuvering are predet...
Chapter
This chapter sketches the origin as well as the further development of the disciplines of dialectic, logic, and rhetoric in antiquity. For the beginnings of dialectic and logic, the chapter turns in Sect. 2.2 to Zeno’s reductio technique and Plato’s three forms of dialectic, for those of rhetoric to the Sophists and the educator Isocrates. The chap...
Chapter
Before embarking on discussions of the various formal dialectical approaches to argumentation, Chapter 6 contains, in Sect. 6.1, a discussion of the nature of formal approaches in general and the ways in which they can be used, followed in Sect. 6.2 by a long exposé about the Erlangen School and its project for the reform of thought and speech need...
Chapter
This chapter contains an introduction into argumentation theory. In Sect. 1.1, the topic of research is introduced. Starting from the meaning of the word “argumentation” in ordinary language, a more technical definition is provided of the term argumentation as it is for research purposes used in argumentation theory. In this definition, argumentati...
Article
The main finding of a comprehensive empirical research project on the intersubjective acceptability of the pragma-dialectical discussion rules (Van Eemeren, Garssen & Meuffels, 2009) is that ordinary language users judge discussion moves that are considered fallacious from an argumentation-theoretical perspective as unreasonable. In light of this f...
Article
Taalgebruikers, zo blijkt uit empirisch onderzoek, achten discussiezetten die vanuit pragmadialectisch perspectief drogredelijk van aard zijn, onredelijk. In het licht van deze empirische bevinding is het opmerkelijk dat in alledaagse discussies drogredenen regelmatig lijken voor te komen en door de discussianten vaak helemaal niet worden opgemerkt...
Chapter
Since the early 1990s is has been our habit to publish regularly volumes with a collection of essays that are indicative of the kind of developments taking place at that moment in the study of argumentation. These volumes are intended to be a service to the discipline by presenting a selection of representative specimens of the state of the art to...
Book
Introduction: Some Highlights in Recent Theorizing Frans H. van Eemeren and Bart Garssen.- Part I: Theoretical Perspectives.- 1. Rhetorical Argument James F. Klumpp.- 2. Meta-Argumentation: Prolegomena to a Dutch Project Maurice A. Finocchiaro.- 3. Wittgenstein's Influence on Hamblin's Concept of "Dialectical" Ralph H. Johnson.- Part II: Views on D...
Article
Full-text available
The introduction of the concept of strategic maneuvering into the pragma-dialectical theory makes it possible to formulate testable hypotheses regarding the persuasiveness of argumentative moves that are made in argumentative discourse. After summarizing the standard pragma-dialectical approach to argumentation, van Eemeren, Garssen, and Meuffels e...
Article
Full-text available
The pragma-dialectical ideal model of a critical discussion takes a normative approach to argumentative discourse. The model defines the four stages of a critical discussion, conditions on speech acts and their distribution over the stages, and a set of 15 procedural rules regimenting the moves discussants may make. These problem-valid rules are in...
Article
Keeping in touch with Pragma-Dialectics is written to honor Frans van Eemeren and his work in the field of argumentation theory on the occasion of his retirement. The volume contains 17 contributions from teams of authors consisting of a combination of a pragma-dialectician and one or twor researchers with a different background in the field of arg...
Article
Full-text available
The epistemologists Biro and Siegel have raised two objections against the pragma-dialectical approach to argumentation. According to the first objection the pragma-dialectical theory is not genuinely normative. According to the second objection the rejection of justificationism by pragma-dialecticians is unwarranted: they reject justificationism p...
Article
In de zogenoemde ‘uitgebreide versie’ van de pragma-dialectiek, de argumentatietheorie waarin de retorische dimensie geïncorporeerd wordt binnen het kader van de dialectiek, vervult de notie ‘strategisch manoeuvreren’ een analytische functie. In dit artikel wordt deze analytische notie op een empirische wijze geïnterpreteerd, zodanig dat er drie to...
Article
In Varietate Concordia—United in Diversity, the motto of the European Union printed proudly on all official paperwork of the European Parliament, proves a smart choice now so many Europeans are ambivalent about the European project. On the one hand the Europeans are afraid that they will lose control over their own national identities as a conseque...
Article
To a large degree, ordinary language users think that discussion moves that from a theoretical perspective are seen as fallacious are indeed unreasonable. This is the main finding of a comprehensive empirical research project on the conventional acceptability of the pragma-dialectical discussion moves. In light of these findings it is remarkable th...
Chapter
The evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins argues that punishment is, scientifically speaking, out of date. He points out that it makes no sense to punish a car when it refuses to start and that it is equally irrational to punish criminals, because in their case something is broken as well: they come from poor families, received poor education or h...
Article
With the aid of a series of interlinked empirical investigations, we attempt to systematically determine whether and to what extent the norms that ordinary arguers generally speaking take (or say they take) into account when participating in argumentative discourse are in accordance with the rules of the ideal model of critical discussion. To exclu...
Article
Using a rather broad definition, fallacies can be characterized as wrong moves in argumentative exchanges. The concept of fallacy is at the core of every full fledged argumentation theory and the treatment of the fallacies can even be regarded the acid test of any particular approach to argumentation. If an argumentation theory can deal with fallac...
Article
In mixed differences of opinion, unlike in the non-mixed differences of opinion discussed in Chapter 5, the parties take an opposite standpoint with regard to the same proposition. They are both the protagonists of their own standpoints but are furthermore antagonists of each others standpoints. Both parties are therefore resigned to an onus proban...
Article
In October 2004, there was a national uproar in the Netherlands about a proposal of Nijmegen’s town council GroenLinksParty to ban the so-called SUVs (Sports Utility Vehicles), usually four-wheel driven off-road vehicles of generous proportions, from Nijmegen’s town centre by making it impossible for them to park there. Led by Mr. Van Eck, spokesma...
Article
The theoretical starting point of the empirical study into the conceptions of ordinary arguers about the reasonableness or unreasonableness of fallacies reported on in this volume is the pragma-dialectical argumentation theory. Characteristic of this theory is that the fallacies are not, as is generally the case in approaches to fallacies based on...
Article
In the following tirade from the Dutch feminist author and politician Anja Meulenbelt a fallacious train of thought is exposed. In her reaction to comments from Hein Roethof, who was in the 1980 s a member of Dutch parliament for the PvdA (Dutch labor party) of the Lower House and – as spokesman for judicial matters – had branded the actions of the...
Article
As was already illustrated in the previous chapter, some discussions get derailed even before the discussant has put forward a single argument. A premature obstruction is also possible due to the discussants not being able to agree on the question who should actually put forward the argumentation: Which of the parties should come up with a defense?...
Article
In a reaction to an essay on male and female analytical skills a critical reader sent in a letter to the editor containing the following passage:
Article
In daily life, anything can go wrong in discussions: Some discussions hardly get off the ground, others progress with the utmost difficulty and yet others are derailed even before an argument is put forward. During a now infamous meeting of the European Council of Ministers, the German Social Democrat Member of European Parliament (MEP) Martin Schu...
Article
Among the dominant theoretical approaches to argumentation, there is a paradigmatic division between rhetorical approaches, concentrating primarily on problems of analysis, and dialectical approaches, focusing more emphatically on problems of evaluation. By methodically integrating relevant insights from rhetoric in a theoretical framework that is...
Book
Pondering on Problems of Argumentation is a collection of twenty essays brought together for anyone who is interested in theoretical issues in the study of argumentation. This collection of papers gives the reader an insightful and balanced view of the kind of theoretical issues argumentation theorists are currently concerned with. Because most of...
Article
Biro en Siegel hebben twee bezwaren geuit tegen de pragma-dialectische argumentatietheorie. Volgens het eerste bezwaar is de theorie niet werkelijk normatief. Volgens het tweede kan de pragma-dialectiek niet op consistente wijze het justificationisme verwerpen en evenwel argumentatie aanvaarden. Het eerste bezwaar is gebaseerd op de misvatting dat...

Network

Cited By