The Epistemic Inferiority of Pragma-Dialectics – Reply to Botting

  title={The Epistemic Inferiority of Pragma-Dialectics – Reply to Botting},
  author={Christoph Lumer},
  journal={Informal Logic},
In a recent paper in this journal, David Botting defended pragma-dialectics against epistemological criticisms by exponents of the epistemological approach to argumentation, i.e. Harvey Siegel, John Biro and me. In particular, Botting tries to justify with new arguments a Functional Claim, that the function of argumentation is to resolve disputes, and a Normative Claim, that standpoints that have the unqualified consensus of all participants in a dispute will generally be epistemically sound… Expand
Procedural Reasonableness and Normativity of Argumentation: Pragma-Dialectical Responses to Epistemologist Objections
Pragma-dialectical argumentation theory has received criticism from epistemological argumentation theorists. While the former emphasizes argumentation as aimed at resolving differences of opinionExpand
The Pragma-Dialectical Theory Under Discussion
During the past thirty years the pragma-dialectical theorizing has developed in various steps from designing an abstract ideal model for critical discussion to examining strategic manoeuvring in theExpand
Procedural Reasonableness and Normativity of Argumentation
Pragma-dialectical argumentation theory has received criticism from epistemological argumentation theorists. While the former emphasizes argumentation as aimed at resolving differences of opinionExpand
The Pragma-Dialectical Theory of Argumentation Under Discussion
  • F. V. Eemeren
  • Sociology, Computer Science
  • Reasonableness and Effectiveness in Argumentative Discourse
  • 2015
When Rob Grootendorst and I started studying argumentation in the early 1970s, we were in the first place interested in developing methods for enhancing the quality of argumentative practices: theExpand
The Paradox of Charity
The principle of charity is used in philosophy of language and argumentation theory as an important principle of interpretation which credits speakers with “the best” plausible interpretation ofExpand
Pragma-Dialetics Epistemologized: Reply to Lumer
I would like to thank Christoph Lumer for his illuminating comments on my paper “The question of truth” published in this journal (Botting 2010) and would like to exercise my right of reply on a fewExpand


A Pragma-Dialectical Default on the Question of Truth
The problem with the pragma-dialectical view, it has been argued, is that it takes argumentation as aiming at consensus rather than truth or justified belief. The pragma- dialecticians often implyExpand
The pragma-dialectician's dilemma: Reply to Garssen and van Laar
Garssen and van Laar in effect concede our main criticism of the pragma-dialectical approach. The criticism is that the conclusions of arguments can be ‘P-D reasonable’ yet patently unreasonable,Expand
Pragma-Dialectics and the Function of Argumentation
This contribution discusses some problems of Pragma-Dialectics and explains them by its consensualistic view of the function of argumentation and by its philosophical underpinnings. It is suggestedExpand
Rationality, Reasonableness, and Critical Rationalism: Problems with the Pragma-dialectical View
A major virtue of the Pragma-Dialectical theory of argumentation is its commitment to reasonableness and rationality as central criteria of argumentative quality. However, the account of these keyExpand
The Epistemological Theory of Argument--How and Why?
The article outlines a general epistemological theory of argument: a theory that regards providingjustified belief as the principal aim of argumentation, and defends it instrumentalistically. AfterExpand
Argumentation, Communication, and Fallacies: A Pragma-dialectical Perspective
Contents: Part I:Argumentation and Communication. The Pragma-Dialectical Approach. Standpoints and Differences of Opinion. Argumentation as a Complex Speech Act. Speech Acts in a Critical Discussion.Expand
The Epistemological Approach to Argumentation - A Map
This contribution gives an overview of the epistemological approach to argumentation. It explains what an 'epistemological approach to argumentation' is, and justifies this approach as being betterExpand
Argument schemes—an epistemological approach
The paper develops a classificatory system of basic argument types on the basis of the epis- temological approach to argumentation. This approach has provided strict rules for several kinds of argu-Expand
Reductionism in Fallacy Theory
Abstract(1) The aim of the paper is to develop a reduction of fallacy theory, i.e. to 'deduce' fallacy theory from a positive theory of argumentation which provides exact criteria for valid andExpand
Epistemic Normativity, Argumentation, and Fallacies
In Biro and Siegel (1992) we argued that a theory of argumentation mustfully engage the normativity of judgments about arguments, and we developedsuch a theory. In this paper we further develop andExpand