Argumentative Resources Research Articles

Press Conference Debates: A Conversational Analysis Study

The study uses a dataset consisting of 30 videos of press conference debates involving the former US President Donald Trump and media reporters and journalists. With reference to the application of conversation analysis (CA), this study examines the opening sequences of press conference debates, revealing that journalists employ various tactics before asking questions. These tactics include expressing disagreement, using reporting speech to convey criticism, and directly criticizing the speaker. These strategies reflect the journalists' professionalism and expertise in the debated subject matter. The study also found that speakers often use accusations to counter evasive responses and shift the debate's focus towards a conclusion. This analysis highlights the tense and confrontational nature of press conference interactions. The power imbalance is evident in the act of taking turns, as reporters consistently construct questions based on their knowledge of the debate topic. The extent of power primarily depends on the effective use of available argumentative resources throughout the interaction.

Mobilising international embeddedness to resist radical policy change and dismantling: the case of Brazil under Jair Bolsonaro (2019–2022)

Unpacking the ‘crisis of democracy’ and what is means and does to policy processes is a new and ever-growing agenda. This paper uses the case of Brazil to examine bureaucratic responses, and attempted resistance, to democratic backsliding and policy dismantling in times of autocratisation, notably under Jair Bolsonaro (2019–2022). It does so by focusing on a less explored transnational lenses. It argues that the growing international embeddedness of Brazilian policies, including through policy transfer and technical cooperation initiatives mostly with other developing countries, has provided domestic sectoral bureaucracies and policy communities with additional strategic discursive and argumentative resources to mobilise, respond and try to resist policy dismantling at home.

Microgenetic development of a primary school child’s argumentative participation in a small-group discussion

ABSTRACT In this study, we analyse a 9-year-old child’s argumentative participation in a group discussion, from a microgenetic development angle. Specifically, we follow one child through the discussion and analyse the development process, defined as changed participation and as interactionally contingent upon the other participants and the teacher. The data consist of one video recording of the group discussion including two dilemmatic tasks for which the children are asked to come to a joint solution. A sequential analysis was performed from a sociocultural perspective on learning and communication. The findings show that the focus child’s argumentative participation develops both quantitatively and qualitatively, and that this development reflects a switch between general agreement amongst the children in the first task and general disagreement in the second task. This disagreement angle is discussed both from an argumentation and an education perspective. Two of the focus child’s argumentative resources (an imaginary space she creates and the use of the concept “data protection”) are discussed in detail.

Life on the Lifeboat

Abstract Animal protection activism has a longstanding relationship to formal philosophizing, most notably through the philosophy of animal rights. Within that tradition, the stylized ethical dilemma plays an important role. This is especially true for the formative work of Tom Regan, where the lifeboat problem is a central argumentative resource. Based on fieldwork with a Scottish animal protection organization, this article explores that relationship but also examines how else activists approach the use of stylized and abbreviated examples. More broadly, the article is concerned with the equivocating relationship at the heart of this practice—that is, between ethical dilemmas and their apparent stylizations, and, on the other hand, between dilemmas and the philosophical arguments that they are taken to serve.

Like and dislike scales in couples’ argumentative interaction

This study investigates regrading (Bilmes, 2019) as an argumentative resource in a Korean reality television show, Transit Love 2. The main concept of Transit Love 2 is that couples who have broken up join the dating show to either reunite with their ex-partners or to meet someone new. Focusing on argumentations about date invitations and relationship issues, this study shows how the participants launch like/dislike scales to justify why one should accept a requested date, restore a former relationship, and avoid sending an ex-partner to a new date. In the analysis, we illustrate the participants' ways of hearably going up and down on a scale and demonstrate how these scalar formulations shape the activities of managing accusatory, argumentative, and appeal-making talk. The findings of this study highlight that scalar regrades of like/dislike emotions are essential to the interactional activity of couples and have immediate consequences on their relational trajectories. This study contributes to a better understanding of how regrading is used in couple's argumentative discourse.

Doctrinal Approaches to Understanding Evidence in a Criminal Case: History and Modernity

The paper discusses the main stages of the development of the theory of criminal procedural evidence. The author analyzes and systematizes various approaches of procedural researchers, on the basis of which the basic doctrinal approaches to understanding evidence are distinguished: 1) formal-logical; 2) factual; 3) dualistic; 4) liminal (transitional); 5) synthetic; 6) cybernetic (informational); 6) pragmatic (Anglo-Saxon). The paper defines the causes of their emergence, evaluates their advantages and disadvantages.It is noted that the diversity of approaches to understanding evidence can be explained by the predetermination of various academic approachers and related legislative provisions, initially different ideological ideas and trends that play a priority role in certain periods of society development. At the same time, it is argued that these approaches do not exclude each other, but reveal different elements of criminal procedural evidence as a comprehended, multidimensional complex of cognitive-certifying techniques and argumentative-logical operations: the cybernetic approach as accumulation of useful information; pragmatic approach as its proper certification; formal-logical and factual approaches as justification of law enforcement decisions and positions of the parties, etc.In this regard, the conclusion is formulated about the optimality and the greatest acceptability for the use of another, so-called non-synthetic approach. Evidence is proposed to be understood as information assets provided for by law and predetermined by substantive or ideal traces-displays, subject to accumulation as legally suitable (permissible) information products, and then used as argumentative resources, which support the investigator, inquiror, court in establishing circumstances relevant to the criminal case and substantiating law enforcement decisions., and to the parties in attempts to influence the nature and content of these decisions.

Too green to be true? Forging a climate consensus at the European Central Bank

ABSTRACT In its 2021 strategy review, the European Central Bank's Governing Council unanimously decided to make climate change one of its priorities for the coming years. In this article, we try to understand how this change was achieved. To do so, we rely on mixed methods, studying ECB policies, speeches, exchanges with the European Parliament, and conducting semi-structured interviews. We present a detailed account of the rapid changes within the ECB regarding the climate challenge, and attempt to unpack its conditions of possibility. We show that climate integration results from the combination and hybridisation of internal dynamics and external pressures. On the one hand, the renewal of the Executive Board and modifications in organisational dynamics secured a growing coalition for a change. On the other, pressures from politicians, NGOs, academics and citizens pushed the institution to develop its expertise and provided willing insiders with further argumentative resources to push their green agenda. While these two intertwined dynamics have allowed ‘green doves’ to forge a consensus around the climate action plan, disagreements remain within the Governing Council on the scope and shape of future greening efforts.

«Ciò che non si vede non esiste» La documentazione pedagogica come narrativa dell’esperienza per e con la famiglia

This article focuses on pedagogical documentation as a narrative of the educational experience for the family. As argumentative resource, the elements of a doctoral research in education, carried out in the Italian city of Pistoia, are presented. Among the privileged aspects are the documentation produced in the city’s crèches, their different forms, typologies and, above all, the common threads and interweavings that make up the relationship of educators with families. The theoretical premise of the work is based on the idea that pedagogical documentation is a narrative that offers visibility and supports educational experiences for and with families in early childhood education services. Considering the different forms and types of ECEC services, two common threads have been identified in the documentation: the image of an active child, with the capacity to grow and establish relationships, and an educational context potentially rich in experiences. The interweaving of the threads occurs in the relationships between educators, children, and families.

Kantian Eudaimonism

AbstractMy aim in this essay is to reorient our understanding of the Kantian ethical project, especially in relation to its assumed rivals. I do this by considering Kant's relation to eudaimonism, especially in its Aristotelian form. I argue for two points. First, once we understand what Kant and Aristotle mean by happiness, we can see that not only is it the case that, by Kant's lights, Aristotle is not a eudaimonist. We can also see that, by Aristotle's lights, Kant is a eudaimonist. Second, we can see that this agreement on eudaimonism actually reflects a deeper, more fundamental agreement on the nature of ethics as a distinctively practical philosophy. This is an important result, not just for the history of moral philosophy but for moral philosophy as well. For it suggests that both Kantians and Aristotelians may well have more argumentative resources available to them than is commonly thought.

HUMAN IDENTITY AND SPIRITUAL INTELLIGENCE

This issue of Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science contains two thematic sections that together provide a rich picture of the human being, focusing on their identity and on their spiritual intelligence. The section on human identity is the result of last year's Science and Religion Forum and its six articles have been collated by Finley Lawson. The section on spiritual intelligence derives from a project funded by the Templeton World Charity Foundation and contains four articles written by Harris Wiseman. For an overview of the articles in both sections, I direct the reader to their respective introductions. The “Articles” section contains four articles. In the first article, Mark Harris investigates the early contributions made to science and religion since the mid-nineteenth century by holders of Edinburgh's “Chair in Natural Science”; in this adaption of his inaugural lecture, he uses the lens of that chair as an entry point to highlight nuances in very early instantiations of the creation-evolution debate. In the second article, Luca Valera and Gabriel Vidal attempt to clarify whether Spinoza was a pantheist, panentheist, or neither of these; they show that this is of relevance in assessing whether his philosophy can serve as a proper foundation for environmental philosophy. In the third article, Megan Loumagne Ulishney reflects on the importance of play as a theologically relevant insight from sexual selection; she emphasize that play is not just the product of “culture,” but is a thoroughly natural phenomenon that provides resources for human cultural elaboration. Finally, in the fourth article, Atle Søvik offers a philosophical explication of why God's revelation is so vague; he finds argumentative resources in a multiverse theory of revelation and divine hiddenness. The issue ends with two book reviews. Ananya Pattnaik reviews Banu Subramaniam's Holy Science: The Biopolitics of Hindu Nationalism, and Jonathan Chappell reviews John Cottingham's In Search of the Soul: A Philosophical Essay. I am very pleased to be able to report that the charitable corporation behind Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science has found a way to “flip” the journal to diamond open access. From January 1, 2024, all Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science articles—past, present, and future—will be freely accessible to all (with no cost to the authors)! More detailed announcements will follow over the course of next year.

Potential of Group-Based Negotiation to Promote Learner-Based Reasoning and Weighting of Arguments on Socioscientific Issues

This study analyzes the potential of group-based negotiation processes based on changes in reasoning and argument weighting for a socioscientific issue (SSI) in biology classes. In the corresponding pre- and post-study, students were encouraged to reason and weight arguments about the conservation of local biodiversity before and after a group-based negotiation. For this purpose, the students employed a target-mat structuring tool for compensatory reasoning and weighting in both the individual pre- and post-phases and the group phase. To identify changes in reasoning after group-based negotiation, the use of argumentative resources, i.e., fact-based and normative resources, was assessed. When the students added confirming reasons for arguments, they were more likely to use fact-based resources. When refuting the initial reasoning, the students tended to add normative resources. Furthermore, individual changes in weightings and their relationship to the group weighting were calculated. This analysis revealed that the students changed their weightings toward the group weighting. The results are discussed in terms of the potential of negotiations to cause students to revise and rethink their reasoning and weighting in addressing SSIs and the particular potential of the target-mat instructional tool for structured decision-making.

ARGUMENTATIVE TECHNIQUES

The article analyses, from the perspective of the dialogical theory-analysis of the discourse of the Bakhtin Circle, and the theory of argumentation of Chaim Pelremam, the opinion articles “Legalizing drugs” by federal deputy Jean Wyllys, published in the magazine Carta Capital and “Legalization of drugs” by Dom Odílo P. Scherer, cardinal-archbishop, published in the newspaper O Estado de São Paulo. The objective is to work on the opinion article genre, given that it has a strong argumentative nature, to analyze the aforementioned theories in order to enrich the theoretical debate on argumentative resources. We chose the topic Legalization of drugs because it is a controversial topic that involves several segments and social institutions in its discussion. In order to do so, the dialogic relationships established between the two authors as well as with other social institutions are analyzed, as well as the argumentative techniques used by both to support their points of view, based on the qualitative and interpretive approach of bibliographic research. It appears that the authors dialogue both with each other and with other voices, such as the Supreme Court of Argentina and the church, whether disagreeing or agreeing, in order to affirm their ideological positions when discussing the legalization of drugs. In our conclusive considerations, we highlight the responsive character of the statements, in which an article is constituted as a response to previous positions, while they are opposed, and we also highlight the presence, in both analyzed articles, of Pelremam’s argumentative techniques that were both the arguments based on the structure of the real and the arguments that found the structure of the real.

Speech Acts and Argumentative Resources in the Speeches Given in Front of the European Parliament by King Juan Carlos I and by King Felipe VI

This paper focuses on comparing the speeches given in front of the European Parliament by King Juan Carlos I on the 14th of May 1986 and by King Felipe VI on the 7th of October 2015 from a pragma-rhetoric perspective. It highlights certain speech acts that may constitute the backbone of the two speeches, as they refer to key topics such as terrorism, the preservation of European values, a more integrated Europe, etc. Moreover, it also attempts to identify significant argumentative resources that were used such as rhetorical figures and various types of arguments. Both speeches reflect some of the issues that the European Union had to tackle at the time they were delivered. King Juan Carlos I urges for a more united Europe and he puts emphasis on the technological challenges that lie ahead. He uses anaphors, a paradox and the ad consequentiam argument. King Felipe VI points out the need of the European Union to identify new internal and external objectives in a more globalized world. He also states that, by joining their forces together, the European states can offer help to the thousands of refugees who were migrating back then mostly from Syria, Afghanistan and Iraq so as to escape war. King Felipe VI uses in his argumentation anaphors, the circular reasoning fallacy, the ad consequentiam argument and the appeal to authority. As a discursive strategy, he mentions that the European Union is “our great common project”, making thus reference to the concept of “project of life” as it was defined by the Spanish philosopher José Ortega y Gasset. Both orators employ personifications of Spain. They both throw a strong light on the role of Spain within the European Union. The text analysis application AntConc is used in order to detect the most used words in their speeches.

Rhetoric of derisive laughter in political debates on the EU.

This paper focuses on the argumentative role of derisive laughter in broadcast political debates. Using Discursive Psychology (DP) we analyse how politicians use derisive laughter as an argumentative resource in multi-party interactions, in the form of debates about the UK and the European Union. Specifically, we explore how both pro- and anti-EU politicians use derisive laughter to manage issues of who-knows-what and who-knows-better. We demonstrate the uses of derisive laughter by focusing on two discrete, yet pervasive, interactional phenomena in our data – extended laughter sequences and snorts. We argue that in the context of political debates derisive laughter does more than signal trouble and communicate contempt; it is, more than often, mobilized in the service of ideological argumentation and used as a form of challenge to factual claims.

Embodied Argumentation in Young Children in Kindergarten

In kindergarten, children are usually engaged with both verbal activities and non-verbal activities, often requiring the manipulation of physical objects. During technical tasks (e.g., problem solving), children can use argumentation as one of the languages of science that mediates how they interact with the surrounding world. In this paper, we focused on technical tasks in kindergarten in order to understand to what extent activities requiring the manipulation of physical objects also leave space for argumentation. The study involved 25 children engaged in three problem-solving activities requiring the manipulation of Lego® and some recycled materials. To analyze the non-verbal (embodied) side of the argumentative activities, we firstly identified the argumentative structure of each exchange involving the participants. Then, we focused on segments of “incomplete” argumentative dialogues (i.e., presenting only some elements typical of children’s argumentation) by appealing to multimodal representations (speech, gestures, and physical objects). The findings of the study showed that even apparently incomplete exchanges can have an argumentative function generated by non-verbal elements of the interactions. Investigating the role of embodied argumentation during technical tasks in kindergarten can allow teachers to recognize and further develop children’s argumentative resources.

Talking about chronic pain: Misalignment in discussions of the body, mind and social aspects in pain clinic consultations.

In Western societies, human existence and illness are mostly constructed from the perspective of mind-body dualism: body and mind are considered to function independently, and the body/the physical as primary and more real. Research shows, however, that mind-body dualism is no longer tenable, especially in healthcare contexts. This led to the rise the biopsychosocial model, in which bodily experiences, including illness, are seen an interplay of the physical and the psychological, and the social. This model is the current gold standard for treating chronic pain. As these perspectives on the body and illness are potentially conflicting, and discursively constructed, this paper examines whether they are a source of misalignment in interactions between chronic pain patients and their doctors in a pain clinic. The analysis shows these perspectives indeed lead to misalignment, for instance when discussing the relevance of psychotherapy, and lead to intricate uses of argumentative resources to account for the differing perspectives on (the treatment of) pain.

Emotional Tension as a Frame for Argumentation and Decision-Making: Vegetarian vs. Omnivorous Diets.

Argumentative discourse has a complexity that is not entirely captured by purely structural analyses. In arguments about socio-scientific issues (SSI), a range of dimensions, besides scientific knowledge, including values, ethical concerns, cultural habits, or emotions, are mobilized. The relationship between argumentation and emotions is now drawing attention of researchers. Our focus is on the dynamic interactions among emotions and scientific evidence. We draw from Plantin, who proposed that emotions are mobilized as argumentative resources alongside knowledge. The goal of our study is to examine in which ways emotional tension frames the construction of arguments about vegetarian vs. omnivorous diets (ODs) with a group of four preservice teachers. The results suggest that the interactions between the group emotional tension and the evaluation of evidence drive a change toward a decision that would be emotionally acceptable for all participants. Participants attended to the epistemic dimension, weighing evidence, and values about the choices, but the emotional framing took priority. We suggest that the analysis of this emotive framing may be a fruitful approach for sophisticated studies of argumentation beyond structural issues.

La "fantasía" de la pandemia Covid-19 en los discursos políticos: las comillas y sus efectos en el género periodístico artículo de opinión

According to Maingueneau’s (1997) conceptions, which emphasizes the relevance of considering the conditions of production when using quotation marks, this work aims to discuss the effects of meaning signaled by the graphic sign, which, besides being a linguistic mark, it is a discursive and argumentative resource present in the journalistic genre opinion article, in which the opinionated content stands out. We adopted the methodology of exploratory research based on discursive theories, covering the perspectives of Maingueneau (1997), Charaudeau (2013), Orlandi (2008) and Pêcheux (1997). In a qualitative approach, we have analyzed the opinion article “Trump e Bolsonaro: aves de mesma plumagem”, published in Folha de São Paulo, to investigate the effects of meaning that quotation marks play in varied statements. The results show that it is essential to consider the circumstantial aspects of the discursive process for the interpretation of the meaning effects produced by the quotation marks and that the genre opinion article has a lot to offer for a linguistic-discursive analysis due to the articulations elaborated with the premise of persuading readers to adhere to a point of view, according to the writers’ political position.

Constructions of LGBTQI+ rights and claims in lay discourse in Greece: Liberal dilemmas and sexual citizenship boundaries

AbstractThis study explores ways in which diverse LGBTQI+ claim frames are sedimented in Greek everyday discourse. Specifically, it is interested in the identification of the argumentative resources that inform lay constructions of LGBTQI+ claims and rights, as well as of their potential social implications. The research data are drawn from seven focus groups, conducted in Thessaloniki, Greece and analysed by the conceptual tools of Critical Discursive Social Psychology. According to the analysis, liberal dilemmas over difference, visibility, and equality are mobilized. In particular, when accounting for violence and discriminations against LGBTQI+ community members, participants construct a normative hierarchy of exclusion, based on alleged differences between sexual and gender‐related categories. Notably, in the context of arguing over different claim‐making practices, participants prioritize the projection of uniformity – instead of difference – through non‐provocative, consensual claiming actions. While liberal concepts and subsequent dilemmas inform these constructions, “liberalism” is also represented as the rhetorical other, when participants prioritize intersectional claims over (sexual and gender‐related) identity politics. Finally, participants' discourse is informed by tensions between oriental and occidental ideological patterns. A juxtaposition between Western/European liberalism and Eastern backwardness is used to challenge homonormative perceptions, which are constructed as a means of de‐radicalization.

Aspects of voice in the use of positioning in polyphonic storytelling: Ventriloquial moves within a biographical interview

This article investigates the rhetorical use of voices and ventrilocution in occasioned storytelling. We explore the use of external voicing in the narration, arguing that to understand voice as an argumentative resource, it is important to include both material and metaphoric aspects of voice. Our article explicates the differences and relations between these two aspects in a polyphonic life story interview. The material voice involves the acoustic sphere of communication: prosody, intonation and tone, whereas the metaphoric voice is commonly understood as a marker of subjectivity or group interests. We juxtapose the latter ‘representative’ interpretation of voice by applying Richard Walsh’s recent theory of metaphorical levels of the voice. Our material consists of a biographical interview with a 92-year-old woman accompanied in the situation by her daughter. The daughter interferes in the interview by telling competing stories about the family past. To unravel the rhetorical moves in the interview, we apply the concept of ventriloquism and the theory of narrative positioning. Our analysis demonstrates how the purposeful use of the material voice transports and signifies metaphoric voices as characters, actors and identities are negotiated in turn-by-turn unfolding narration.