Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM


Top Flashcards (Certified)
All Flashcards

argumentation discourse > Begrippen > Flashcards

Begrippen Flashcards

1
Q

argumentative discussion

A
  • aimed at coming to a reasonable agreement

- to make use of argumentation as a means to achieve a resolution of a difference of opinion

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

a difference of opinion

A
  • when two parties do not fully agree on a standpoint

- not necessarily an opposing standpoint; doubt is enough

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

explicit difference of opinion

A

Both the standpoint and the rejection of it are cleary expressed

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

implicit difference of opinion

A
  • only one party puts forward its views, the other party’s speticism or doubt is anticipated
  • especially in written text
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

proposition

A
  • the content of a statement in which a certain property or quality is ascribed to the person or thing referred to
  • description, prediction, judgement, advice
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

standpoint

A
  • the position one takes with respect to a proposition

- positive standpoint, negative standpoint, neutral standpoint

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

single difference of opinion

A
  • only one standpoint is adopted (whether positive or negative)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

multiple difference of opinion

A

the standpoint relates to more than one proposition

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

non-mixed difference of opinion

A

there is only one party who is committed to defending a standpoint ( the other party is only doubting)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

mixed difference of opinion

A

opposing standpoints are adopted with respect to the same proposition

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

the elementary form

A

a single, non-mixed difference of opinion

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

main difference of opinion

A

the main disagreement

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

subordinate difference

A

disagreements that may arise during the discussion about the main disagreement

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

resolving a difference of opinion versus settling a difference of opinion

A

uncivilized: threatening

civilized 3rd party

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

critical discussion

A

an ideal argumentative discussion aimed at resolving a difference of opinion
- takes place between a protagonist and an antagonis

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

protagonist

A

a party who defends a standpoint

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

antagonist

A

a party that callenges the standpoint of the protagonist

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

discussion stages

A

confrontation stage, opening stage, argumentation stage, concluding stage

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

confrontation stage

A

the parties establish that they have a difference of opinion

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

opening stage

A
  • the parties decide to resolve the difference of opinion
  • they assign the roles
  • they agree on the rules
  • they agree on starting points
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

argumentation stage

A

the protagonist defends the standpoint by putting forward arguments

22
Q

concluding

A

the parties asses to which extent the difference has been resolved and in whose favor

23
Q

progressive presentation

A

the standpoint follows the argument, thus/therefore

24
Q

retrogressive presentation

A

the standpoint is given before the argument, because/since

25
'because'
is often used for explanations, elaborations or clarifications. Is not used as argumentation sinve it is already accepted, "the pudding didn't stiff because, i didn't put enough gelatin in it.
26
maximally argumentative interpretation
- everything is interpreted as argumentation, minimizes the risk of overlooking timportant utterances for your analysis
27
unexpressed premises
when certain elements of argumentation are intenionally left out/implicitly present
28
unexpressed standpoints
when a standpoint is unexpressed.
29
the communication principle
be clear be sincere be efficient keep to the point
30
the clarity rule
whatever is said should be as easy to understand as possible
31
the sincerity rule
whatever is said must not be insincere
32
the efficiency rule
whatever is said should not be redundant or pountless
33
the relevancy rule
whatever is said must connect with what has gone before
34
recognizing indirectness
- by violating one or more of the communication rules, yet at the same time not abandoning the communication principle - the listener tries to be the speaker's words in such a way that the violation acquires a plausible meaning - listeners know it is happening because it is the only way to make sense of an obvious violation of the communication rules
35
correctnessconditions
- conditions that mus be fulfilled for a speech act to be correct - prepatory conditions - responisbility conditions
36
prepatory conditions
state what the speaker must do in order to follow the efficiency rule
37
responsibility conditions
describe what the speaker must believe in order to follow the sincerity rule
38
making unexpressed standpoints explicit
- by using logic - if there is more than one possibility, choose the standpoint that is most fitting in the light of context and background information
39
making unexpressed premises explicit
"if...then..." statement
40
modus ponens
if p then q p therefore q
41
modus tollens
If p, then q not q therefore, not P
42
multiple argumentation
- alternative defenses of the same standpoint, presented one after another - do not depend on each other - are of equal weight
43
coordinative argumentation
- a combination of argument that must be taken together to constitute a conclusive defense - sometimes each argument by itself is too weak - sometimes the second argument rules out possible objections to the first argument
44
subordinative argumentation
- arguments are given for arguments | - the weakest link determines the strength of the whole
45
single argumentation
one argument as defense for a standpoint, consists of two premises of which one is unexpresed
46
maximally argumentative analysis
when ther is just as much reason to choose the coordinative as the multiple analysis it is preferable to opt for multiple argumentatio - this ensures that each part of the argumentation is judged on it's own merits
47
logical inconsistency
when statements cannot possibly both be true because they contradict each other
48
pragmatic inconsistency
when argumentation contains two statements that are not logically inconsistent, but have consquences in the real world
49
a sound argument
- each of the statements that make up the argument must be acceptable - the reasoning underlying the argument must be valid - the argument scheme must be appropriate and correctly used
50
argumentation based on a symptomatic relation
- y is true of x, because z is true of x and z is symptomatic of y - aren't there non-y's that have characteristic x? - aren't there also other y's that have characteristic x?
51
argumentation based on a relation of analogy
- y is true of x, because y is true of z and z is comparable to x. - are there any significant differences between z and x?
52
argumentation based on a causal relation
- Y is true of x, because z is true of x and z leads to x. | - does z always lead to x?

argumentation discourse (4 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2025 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions