Frans H Van Eemeren
Biographic Data
| ID | 96746 |
|---|---|
| NAME | Frans H Van Eemeren |
| GIVEN NAMES | Frans H |
| FAMILY NAME | Van Eemeren |
| SIGNATURE | VAN EEMEREN F H |
| AFFILIATIONS | University of Amsterdam |
| ORCID | 0000-0002-6694-3488 |
| VERIFIED | Yes |
| TOTAL WORKS | 30 |
| TOTAL CITATIONS | 113 |
| AUTHOR COUNT | 23 |
| EDITOR COUNT | 7 |
| FIRST PUBLICATION YEAR | 1982 |
| LATEST PUBLICATION YEAR | 2025 |
| H-INDEX | 4 |
Why Argumentation Theory? Realizing the Practical Objectives of Argumentation Theory as the Study of Effectiveness Through Reasonableness
The Making of Argumentation Theory: A Pragma-dialectical View
In ‘The making of argumentation theory’ van Eemeren and van Haaften describe the contributions made to the five components of a full-fledged research program of argumentation theory by four prominent approaches to the discipline: formal dialectics, rhetoric/pragmalinguistics, informal logic, and pragma-dialectics. Most of these approaches do not contribute to all components, but to some in particular. Starting from the pragma-dialectical view of …
The Pragma-Dialectical Approach to the Fallacies Revisited
This article explains the design and development of the pragma-dialectical approach to fallacies. In this approach fallacies are viewed as violations of the standards for critical discussion that are expressed in a code of conduct for reasonable argumentative discourse. After the problem-solving validity in resolving differences of opinion of the rules of this code has been discussed, their conventional validity for real-life arguers is demonstra…
From Argument Schemes to Argumentative Relations in the Wild: A Variety of Contributions to Argumentation Theory
Argumentation in Actual Practice: Topical Studies about Argumentative Discourse in Context
"Argumentation in Actual Practice contains a collection of topical studies about argumentative discourse in context written by argumentation scholars from a diversity of academic backgrounds. Some contributions provide general perspectives, other contributions deal with specific issues, particular types of argumentative discourse or individual argumentative speech events. The contexts in which argumentation is examined vary from politics and the …
Argumentation Theory: A Pragma-Dialectical Perspective
The History of the Argumentum Ad Hominem Since the Seventeenth Century
Reasonableness and Effectiveness in Argumentative Discourse: Fifty Contributions to the Development of Pragma-Dialectics
The Rhetoric of William the Silent’s Apologie a Dialectical Perspective
Handbook of Argumentation Theory
Dialectic and Rhetoric: The Warp and Woof of Argumentation Analysis
Fallacies as derailments of argumentative discourse: Acceptance based on understanding and critical assessment
Maniobras estratégicas: Combinando lo razonable y lo efectivo en el discurso argumentativo
Después de explicar su concepción de la argumentación como tema para teorizar, Frans H. van Eemeren presenta un esbozo del programa de investigación del acercamiento pragma-dialéctico a la argumentación, introduciendo los principales componentes de la teoría de la argumentación que resultan del desarrollo de este programa. Posteriormente se centra en el problema fundamental que confrontan los teóricos de la argumentación al buscar distinguir entr…
Exploring argumentative contexts
Topical Themes in Argumentation Theory: Twenty Exploratory Studies
Strategic Maneuvering in Argumentative Discourse: Extending the pragma-dialectical theory of argumentation
In Strategic Maneuvering in Argumentative Discourse , Frans H. van Eemeren brings together the dialectical and the rhetorical dimensions of argumentation by introducing the concept of strategic maneuvering. Strategic maneuvering refers to the arguer’s continual efforts to reconcile aiming for effectiveness with being reasonable. It takes place in all stages of argumentative discourse and manifests itself simultaneously in the choices that are mad…
Examining argumentation in context: Fifteen Studies on Strategic Maneuvering
Dialectical profiles and indicators of argumentative moves
The study of argumentation as normative pragmatics
In the study of argumentation there is a sharp and ideological separation between dialectical and rhetorical approaches, which needs to be remedied. The authors show how the pragma-dialectical theory of argumentation can be instrumental in bridging the gap. By adopting a research programme that involves engaging in ‘normative pragmatics’, not only the critical normative and the empirical descriptive dimensions of the study of argumentation can be…
Argumentative Indicators in Discourse: A Pragma-Dialectical Study
A Systematic Theory of Argumentation: The pragma-dialectical approach
In this book two of the leading figures in argumentation theory present a view of argumentation as a means of resolving differences of opinion by testing the acceptability of the disputed positions. Their model of a 'critical discussion' serves as a theoretical tool for analysing, evaluating and producing argumentative discourse. They develop a method for the reconstruction of argumentative discourse that takes into account all aspects that are r…
The (Un)Reasonableness of Ad Hominem Fallacies
Starting from a pragmadialectical concept of reasonableness, the judgments of ordinary arguers concerning the reasonableness of discussion moves were investigated, concentrating on argumentum ad hominem fallacies. Three variants of ad hominem were presented to the respondents: (a) the abusive direct personal attack, (b) the circumstantial indirect personal attack, and (c) the you too! (tu quoque) variant. These fallacies were incorporated in item…
Strategic Manoeuvring in Argumentative Discourse
This article reacts against the undesirable ideological separation between dialectical and rhetorical approaches to argumentative discourse. It argues that a sound evaluation of argumentation requires an analysis that reveals all aspects of the discourse pertinent to critical testing. To explain the rationale of the various moves made in the discourse and the strategic patterns behind them, not only the interlocutors' dialectical goals must be ta…
The History of The Argumentum Ad Hominem Since The Seventeenth Century
In this paper, we present an historical and systematic overview of the study of the argumentum ad hominem since the seventeenth century. We discuss the main pre-Hamblin approaches (Locke, Whately, Schopenhauer, Perelman, Johnstone), the Standard Treatment (Hamblin, Copi, Rescher, Kahane), and recent post-Hamblin developments (formal dialectics, pragma-dialectics, Woods and Walton).
A transition stage in the theory of fallacies
A Systematic Theory of Argumentation: The pragma-dialectical approach
In this book two of the leading figures in argumentation theory present a view of argumentation as a means of resolving differences of opinion by testing the acceptability of the disputed positions. Their model of a 'critical discussion' serves as a theoretical tool for analysing, evaluating and producing argumentative discourse. They develop a method for the reconstruction of argumentative discourse that takes into account all aspects that are r…
Strategic Manoeuvring in Argumentative Discourse
This article reacts against the undesirable ideological separation between dialectical and rhetorical approaches to argumentative discourse. It argues that a sound evaluation of argumentation requires an analysis that reveals all aspects of the discourse pertinent to critical testing. To explain the rationale of the various moves made in the discourse and the strategic patterns behind them, not only the interlocutors' dialectical goals must be ta…
Dialectical profiles and indicators of argumentative moves
The speech acts of arguing and convincing in externalized discussions
The (Un)Reasonableness of Ad Hominem Fallacies
Starting from a pragmadialectical concept of reasonableness, the judgments of ordinary arguers concerning the reasonableness of discussion moves were investigated, concentrating on argumentum ad hominem fallacies. Three variants of ad hominem were presented to the respondents: (a) the abusive direct personal attack, (b) the circumstantial indirect personal attack, and (c) the you too! (tu quoque) variant. These fallacies were incorporated in item…
The speech acts of arguing and convincing in externalized discussions
Speech Acts in Argumentative Discussions: A Theoretical Model for the Analysis of Discussions Directed Towards Solving Conflicts of Opinion
Argumentation: Analysis and Practices
Across the Lines of Disciplines
Handbook of Argumentation Theory: A Critical Survey of Classical Backgrounds and Modern Studies
A transition stage in the theory of fallacies
The History of The Argumentum Ad Hominem Since The Seventeenth Century
In this paper, we present an historical and systematic overview of the study of the argumentum ad hominem since the seventeenth century. We discuss the main pre-Hamblin approaches (Locke, Whately, Schopenhauer, Perelman, Johnstone), the Standard Treatment (Hamblin, Copi, Rescher, Kahane), and recent post-Hamblin developments (formal dialectics, pragma-dialectics, Woods and Walton).
Strategic Manoeuvring in Argumentative Discourse
This article reacts against the undesirable ideological separation between dialectical and rhetorical approaches to argumentative discourse. It argues that a sound evaluation of argumentation requires an analysis that reveals all aspects of the discourse pertinent to critical testing. To explain the rationale of the various moves made in the discourse and the strategic patterns behind them, not only the interlocutors' dialectical goals must be ta…
The (Un)Reasonableness of Ad Hominem Fallacies
Starting from a pragmadialectical concept of reasonableness, the judgments of ordinary arguers concerning the reasonableness of discussion moves were investigated, concentrating on argumentum ad hominem fallacies. Three variants of ad hominem were presented to the respondents: (a) the abusive direct personal attack, (b) the circumstantial indirect personal attack, and (c) the you too! (tu quoque) variant. These fallacies were incorporated in item…
A Systematic Theory of Argumentation: The pragma-dialectical approach
In this book two of the leading figures in argumentation theory present a view of argumentation as a means of resolving differences of opinion by testing the acceptability of the disputed positions. Their model of a 'critical discussion' serves as a theoretical tool for analysing, evaluating and producing argumentative discourse. They develop a method for the reconstruction of argumentative discourse that takes into account all aspects that are r…
The study of argumentation as normative pragmatics
In the study of argumentation there is a sharp and ideological separation between dialectical and rhetorical approaches, which needs to be remedied. The authors show how the pragma-dialectical theory of argumentation can be instrumental in bridging the gap. By adopting a research programme that involves engaging in ‘normative pragmatics’, not only the critical normative and the empirical descriptive dimensions of the study of argumentation can be…
Argumentative Indicators in Discourse: A Pragma-Dialectical Study
Dialectical profiles and indicators of argumentative moves
Examining argumentation in context: Fifteen Studies on Strategic Maneuvering
Strategic Maneuvering in Argumentative Discourse: Extending the pragma-dialectical theory of argumentation
In Strategic Maneuvering in Argumentative Discourse , Frans H. van Eemeren brings together the dialectical and the rhetorical dimensions of argumentation by introducing the concept of strategic maneuvering. Strategic maneuvering refers to the arguer’s continual efforts to reconcile aiming for effectiveness with being reasonable. It takes place in all stages of argumentative discourse and manifests itself simultaneously in the choices that are mad…
Exploring argumentative contexts
Topical Themes in Argumentation Theory: Twenty Exploratory Studies
Dialectic and Rhetoric: The Warp and Woof of Argumentation Analysis
Fallacies as derailments of argumentative discourse: Acceptance based on understanding and critical assessment
Maniobras estratégicas: Combinando lo razonable y lo efectivo en el discurso argumentativo
Después de explicar su concepción de la argumentación como tema para teorizar, Frans H. van Eemeren presenta un esbozo del programa de investigación del acercamiento pragma-dialéctico a la argumentación, introduciendo los principales componentes de la teoría de la argumentación que resultan del desarrollo de este programa. Posteriormente se centra en el problema fundamental que confrontan los teóricos de la argumentación al buscar distinguir entr…
Handbook of Argumentation Theory
The History of the Argumentum Ad Hominem Since the Seventeenth Century
Reasonableness and Effectiveness in Argumentative Discourse: Fifty Contributions to the Development of Pragma-Dialectics
The Rhetoric of William the Silent’s Apologie a Dialectical Perspective
Argumentation Theory: A Pragma-Dialectical Perspective
Philosophy (29 works) · Epistemology (24 works) · Argumentation theory (19 works) · Argumentative (16 works) · Linguistics (16 works) · Sociology (16 works) · Computer Science (13 works) · Multi-Agent Systems and Negotiation (13 works) · Psychology (12 works) · Dialectic (11 works)