Fallacies and judgments of reasonableness: empirical research concerning the pragma-dialectical discussion rules
Gespeichert in:
| Beteiligte Personen: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Buch |
| Sprache: | Englisch |
| Veröffentlicht: |
Dordrecht [u.a.]
Springer
2009
|
| Schriftenreihe: | Argumentation Library
16 |
| Schlagwörter: | |
| Links: | http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=017696633&sequence=000001&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA |
| Umfang: | X, 231 S. 235 mm x 155 mm |
| ISBN: | 9789048126132 9789048126149 |
Internformat
MARC
| LEADER | 00000nam a2200000 cb4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | BV035641859 | ||
| 003 | DE-604 | ||
| 005 | 20100222 | ||
| 007 | t| | ||
| 008 | 090723s2009 xx |||| 00||| eng d | ||
| 015 | |a 09,N12,0001 |2 dnb | ||
| 016 | 7 | |a 992999464 |2 DE-101 | |
| 020 | |a 9789048126132 |c GB. : EUR 106.95 (freier Pr.), sfr 166.00 (freier Pr.) |9 978-90-481-2613-2 | ||
| 020 | |a 9789048126149 |9 978-90-481-2614-9 | ||
| 024 | 3 | |a 9789048126132 | |
| 028 | 5 | 2 | |a 12608409 |
| 035 | |a (OCoLC)321018477 | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-599)DNB992999464 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-604 |b ger |e rakddb | ||
| 041 | 0 | |a eng | |
| 049 | |a DE-473 |a DE-29 |a DE-12 |a DE-355 | ||
| 050 | 0 | |a P301.5.P47 | |
| 082 | 0 | |a 165 |2 22 | |
| 084 | |a CC 3200 |0 (DE-625)17614: |2 rvk | ||
| 084 | |a ER 620 |0 (DE-625)27737: |2 rvk | ||
| 084 | |a 5,1 |2 ssgn | ||
| 084 | |a 000 |2 sdnb | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Eemeren, Frans H. van |d 1946- |e Verfasser |0 (DE-588)133439402 |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Fallacies and judgments of reasonableness |b empirical research concerning the pragma-dialectical discussion rules |c Frans van Eemeren ; Bart Garssen ; Bert Meuffels |
| 264 | 1 | |a Dordrecht [u.a.] |b Springer |c 2009 | |
| 300 | |a X, 231 S. |c 235 mm x 155 mm | ||
| 336 | |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |b n |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |b nc |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 490 | 1 | |a Argumentation Library |v 16 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Fallacies (Logic) | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Persuasion (Rhetoric) | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Reasoning | |
| 650 | 0 | 7 | |a Fehlschluss |0 (DE-588)4132069-4 |2 gnd |9 rswk-swf |
| 689 | 0 | 0 | |a Fehlschluss |0 (DE-588)4132069-4 |D s |
| 689 | 0 | |5 DE-604 | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Garssen, Bart |e Verfasser |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Meuffels, Bert |e Verfasser |4 aut | |
| 830 | 0 | |a Argumentation Library |v 16 |w (DE-604)BV012739610 |9 16 | |
| 856 | 4 | 2 | |m Digitalisierung UB Erlangen |q application/pdf |u http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=017696633&sequence=000001&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA |3 Inhaltsverzeichnis |
| 943 | 1 | |a oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-017696633 | |
Datensatz im Suchindex
| _version_ | 1819364863957270528 |
|---|---|
| adam_text | CONTENTS 1 THEORETICAL BACKGROUND AND ORGANIZATION OF THE STUDY 1 1.1
INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1.2 A HISTORICAL OVERVIEW OF THE
STUDY OF FALLACIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1.2.1 THE
ARISTOTELIAN APPROACH TO FALLACIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.2.2 THE AD FALLACIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . 6 1.2.3 SYLLOGISTIC AND INDUCTIVE FALLACIES . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 1.2.4 THE TREATMENT OF
FALLACIES IN LOGIC TEXTBOOKS . . . . . . . . . . . 8 1.3 MODERN
THEORETICAL APPROACHES TO THE FALLACIES 12 1.3.1 HAMBLIN S CRITICISMS
OFTHE STANDARD TREATMENT 12 1.3.2 POST-HAMBLIN TREATMENTS OF THE
FALLACIES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 15 1.3.3 THE WOODS-WALTON
APPROACH...... 16 1.3.4 THE FORMAL-DIALECTICAL APPROACH . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . .. 18 1.3.5 WALTON S PRAGMATIC APPROACH 18 1.4
THE PRAGMA-DIALECTICAL APPROACH 20 1.4.1 FALLACIES AS RULE VIOLATIONS .
. . . . . . . . . . .. 20 1.4.2 PROBLEM VALIDITY AND CONVENTIONAL
VALIDITY . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 25 1.5 PLAN OF THE EMPIRICAL STUDY .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 28 1.6
STRUCTURE OF THIS VOLUME 30 2 CONSIDERATIONS REGARDING THE DESIGN OF THE
STUDY ..... . . . . . . . . . . . .. 31 2.1 AN OUTLINE OF METHODOLOGICAL
BACKGROUNDS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 31 2.2 BOWKER AND
TRAPP S RESEARCH OF ORDINARY ARGUERS ASSESSMENT OF ARGUMENTATION 33 2.3
IMPLICATIONS OF THE DISCUSSION OF BOWKER AND TRAPP S RESEARCH 38 2.4
SCHREIER, GROEBEN AND CHRISTMANN S STUDIES ON ARGUMENTATIONAL
INTEGRITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . .. 41 2.4.1 RULES FOR ARGUMENTATIONAL INTEGRITY 41 2.4.2 THE
EMPIRICAL EXTRACTION OF STANDARDS OF FAIR AND UNFAIR ARGUMENTATION . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 2.4.3 THE NATURE OF
THE QUESTIONING IN THE INTEGRITY STUDY; THE ECOLOGICAL VALIDITY . .. . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 44 VII VIII 2.5
CONTENTS 2.4.4 ISSUES CONCERNING THE INTERNAL VALIDITY: THE LOADEDNESS
OF THE TOPIC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . .. 46 ALTERNATIVE METHODS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 47 3.6 3.4 3.5 3 AD
HOMINEM FALLACIES: AN EXEMPLARY STUDY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . .. 51 3.1 VARIANTS OFTHE ARGUMENTUM AD HOMINEM 52 3.2 AD HOMINEM
ATTACKS: FALLACIES OR NOT? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.. 54 3.3 ORGANIZATION OF THE STUDY 57 3.3.1 OUTLINE OFTHE TEST 57 3.3.2
RESPONDENTS........................................ 58 3.3.3 HYPOTHESES:
INDEPENDENT VARIABLES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 58 3.3.4
TEST MATERIAL. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . .. 62 3.3.5 PROCEDURE: INSTRUCTION . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 66 RESULTS . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . .. 67 DISCUSSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 70 3.5.1 POLITENESS AS AN
ALTERNATIVE EXPLANATION: MOTIVATIONS ..... 70 3.5.2 POLITENESS AS AN
ALTERNATIVE EXPLANATION: REASONABLE VERSUS FALLACIOUS PERSONAL ATTACKS
72 3.5.3 POLITENESS AS AN ALTERNATIVE EXPLANATION: STATISTICAL
ELIMINATION OF THE COVARIATE POLITENESS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
76 3.5.4 THE NATURE OF THE STANDPOINT AS ALTERNATIVE EXPLANATION . .. 78
3.5.5 EXTERNAL VALIDITY 81 CONCLUSION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 82 4 THE
CONFRONTATION STAGE: THE FREEDOM RULE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . .. 85 4.1 THE FREEDOM RULE 85 4.2 THE ARGUMENTUM AD BACULUM, THE
ARGUMENTUM AD MISERICORDIAM, DECLARING A STANDPOINT TABOO OR SACROSANCT
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . .. 86 4.3 JUDGING ABOUT THE REASONABLENESS OR
UNREASONABLENESS OF DISCUSSION MOVES WITH AND WITHOUT VIOLATION OF THE
FREEDOM RULE 90 4.4 RESULTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 93 4.5
POLITENESS AS AN ALTERNATIVE EXPLANATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . .. 95 4.6 THE LOADEDNESS OF THE STANDPOINT ..... . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 97 4.7 CULTURAL DIFFERENCES AND THE
FREEDOM RULE 102 4.8 CONCLUSIONS 108 5 THE OPENING STAGE: THE
OBLIGATION.TO-DEREND RULE (I) L11 5.1 THE OBLIGATION-TO-DEFEND RULE IN
NON-MIXED DISPUTES 111 5.2 THE BURDEN OF PROOF: ONUS PROBANDI 113 5.3
SHIFTING THE BURDEN OFPROOF 115 5.3.1 SET-UP: MATERIAL 116 5.3.2 RESULTS
118 CONTENTS IX 5.4 EVADING THE BURDEN OF PROOF: PRESENTING THE
STANDPOINT AS SELF-EVIDENT 120 5.4.1 SET-UP: MATERIAL 121 5.4.2 RESULTS
122 5.5 EVADING THE BURDEN OF PROOF: PERSONALLY GUARANTEEING THE
CORRECTNESS OF THE STAND POINT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . .. 126 5.5.1 SET-UP: MATERIAL 129 5.5.2
RESULTS............................................ 131 5.6 EVADING THE
BURDEN OF PROOF: IMMUNIZING A STANDPOINT AGAINST CRITICISM. . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . .. 133 5.6.1 SET-UP: MATERIAL 134 5.6.2 RESULTS 135 5.7
CONCLUSIONS 136 6 THE OPENING STAGE: THE OBLIGATION-TO-DEFEND (11) 139
6.1 THE BURDEN OF PROOF IN MIXED DIFFERENCES OF OPINION 139 6.2 THE
SEQUENTIAL PROBLEM IN MIXED DIFFERENCES OFOPINION 140 6.3 THE
PRESUMPTION PRINCIPLE AND THE SEQUENTIAL PROBLEM IN MIXED DIFFERENCES
OFOPINION 141 6.4 THE ROLE OF PRESUMPTIONS IN SHIFTING AND EVADING THE
BURDEN OF PROOF. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 144 6.4.1 SET-UP: MATERIAL
144 6.4.2 RESULTS 148 6.4.3 THE NECESSITY OFREPLICATION 150 6.5 EXPLICIT
VERBAL INDICATORS AS TO THE PRESUMPTION PRINCIPLE AND EVADING THE BURDEN
OF PROOF 151 6.5.1 SET-UP: MATERIAL 151 6.5.2 RESULTS 155 6.6 THE
SEQUENTIAL ORDER RULE VERSUS THE OBLIGATION-TO-DEFEND RULE .. 157 6.6.1
REPLICATION: SET-UP AND MATERIAL 158 6.6.2 REPLICATION: RESULTS 158 6.7
CONCLUSIONS 160 7 THE ARGUMENTATION STAGE: THE ARGUMENT SCHEME RUJE 163
7.1 OVERVIEW OF RULES FOR THE ARGUMENTATION STAGE 163 7.2 ARGUMENT
SCHEMES, CRITICAL QUESTIONS AND TYPES OFFALLACIES 166 7.3
THEARGUMENTUMADCONSEQUENTIAM 171 7.3.1 SET-UP: MATERIAL - VARIANT I 173
7.3.2 RESULTS - VARIANT I 175 7.3.3 SET-UP: MATERIAL- VARIANT 11 177
7.3.4 RESULTS - VARIANT 11 178 7.3.5 RESPONDENTS MOTIVATIONS 180 7.4
THE ARGUMENTUM AD POPULUM 182 7.4.1 SET-UP: MATERIAL 184 7.4.2 RESULTS
185 X 7.5 7.6 7.7 CONTENTS THE FALLACY OF THE SLIPPERY SLOPE 185 7.5.1
SET-UP: MATERIAL 187 7.5.2 RESULTS 188 THE FALLACY OF FALSE ANALOGY 188
7.6.1 SET-UP: MATERIAL 189 7.6.2 RESULTS 190 CONCLUSIONS 190 8 THE
CONCLUDING STAGE: THE CONCLUDING RULE 193 8.1 THE CONCLUDING RULE 193
8.2 VIOLATIONS OF THE CONCLUDING RULE 194 8.3 THE FALLACIOUS NATURE OF
THE ARGUMENTUM AD 19NORANTIAM 195 8.3.1 SET-UP: MATERIAL 196 8.3.2
RESULTS 199 8.3.3 RESPONDENTS MOTIVATIONS 200 8.4 CONCLUSION 201 9
CONVENTIONAL VALIDITY OF THE PRAGMA-DIALECTICAL DISCUSSION RULES .....
203 9.1 THEORETICAL STARTING POINT OF THE RESEARCH PROJECT CONCEPTIONS
OF REASONABLENESS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 203 9.2 REASONABLENESS JUDGMENTS ON
INDIVIDUAL FALLACIES 205 9.3 CONSIDERATIONS CONCERNING OUR CONCLUSIONS
208 9.4 CONSIDERING A REPLICATION WITH REALISTIC EXAMPLES 214 9.4.1
SELECTION OFTHE MATERIAL 215 9.4.2 MEASURING THE DEPENDENT VARIABLE
REASONABLENESS 217 9.4.3 RESULTS 218 9.5 THE UNREASONABLENESS OF
FALLACIES IN A PRAGMA-DIALECTICAL PERSPECTIVE 219 REFERENCES 225 INDEX
229
|
| any_adam_object | 1 |
| author | Eemeren, Frans H. van 1946- Garssen, Bart Meuffels, Bert |
| author_GND | (DE-588)133439402 |
| author_facet | Eemeren, Frans H. van 1946- Garssen, Bart Meuffels, Bert |
| author_role | aut aut aut |
| author_sort | Eemeren, Frans H. van 1946- |
| author_variant | f h v e fhv fhve b g bg b m bm |
| building | Verbundindex |
| bvnumber | BV035641859 |
| callnumber-first | P - Language and Literature |
| callnumber-label | P301 |
| callnumber-raw | P301.5.P47 |
| callnumber-search | P301.5.P47 |
| callnumber-sort | P 3301.5 P47 |
| callnumber-subject | P - Philology and Linguistics |
| classification_rvk | CC 3200 ER 620 |
| ctrlnum | (OCoLC)321018477 (DE-599)DNB992999464 |
| dewey-full | 165 |
| dewey-hundreds | 100 - Philosophy & psychology |
| dewey-ones | 165 - Fallacies and sources of error |
| dewey-raw | 165 |
| dewey-search | 165 |
| dewey-sort | 3165 |
| dewey-tens | 160 - Philosophical logic |
| discipline | Allgemeines Sprachwissenschaft Philosophie Literaturwissenschaft |
| format | Book |
| fullrecord | <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01989nam a2200517 cb4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">BV035641859</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-604</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20100222 </controlfield><controlfield tag="007">t|</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">090723s2009 xx |||| 00||| eng d</controlfield><datafield tag="015" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">09,N12,0001</subfield><subfield code="2">dnb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="016" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">992999464</subfield><subfield code="2">DE-101</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="020" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">9789048126132</subfield><subfield code="c">GB. : EUR 106.95 (freier Pr.), sfr 166.00 (freier Pr.)</subfield><subfield code="9">978-90-481-2613-2</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="020" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">9789048126149</subfield><subfield code="9">978-90-481-2614-9</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="024" ind1="3" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">9789048126132</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="028" ind1="5" ind2="2"><subfield code="a">12608409</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(OCoLC)321018477</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)DNB992999464</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-604</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="e">rakddb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="049" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-473</subfield><subfield code="a">DE-29</subfield><subfield code="a">DE-12</subfield><subfield code="a">DE-355</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">P301.5.P47</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">165</subfield><subfield code="2">22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">CC 3200</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-625)17614:</subfield><subfield code="2">rvk</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">ER 620</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-625)27737:</subfield><subfield code="2">rvk</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">5,1</subfield><subfield code="2">ssgn</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">000</subfield><subfield code="2">sdnb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Eemeren, Frans H. van</subfield><subfield code="d">1946-</subfield><subfield code="e">Verfasser</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)133439402</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Fallacies and judgments of reasonableness</subfield><subfield code="b">empirical research concerning the pragma-dialectical discussion rules</subfield><subfield code="c">Frans van Eemeren ; Bart Garssen ; Bert Meuffels</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="a">Dordrecht [u.a.]</subfield><subfield code="b">Springer</subfield><subfield code="c">2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="300" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">X, 231 S.</subfield><subfield code="c">235 mm x 155 mm</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">n</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="b">nc</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="490" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Argumentation Library</subfield><subfield code="v">16</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Fallacies (Logic)</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Persuasion (Rhetoric)</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Reasoning</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1="0" ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Fehlschluss</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4132069-4</subfield><subfield code="2">gnd</subfield><subfield code="9">rswk-swf</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Fehlschluss</subfield><subfield code="0">(DE-588)4132069-4</subfield><subfield code="D">s</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="689" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="5">DE-604</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Garssen, Bart</subfield><subfield code="e">Verfasser</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Meuffels, Bert</subfield><subfield code="e">Verfasser</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="830" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Argumentation Library</subfield><subfield code="v">16</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-604)BV012739610</subfield><subfield code="9">16</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="m">Digitalisierung UB Erlangen</subfield><subfield code="q">application/pdf</subfield><subfield code="u">http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=017696633&sequence=000001&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA</subfield><subfield code="3">Inhaltsverzeichnis</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="943" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-017696633</subfield></datafield></record></collection> |
| id | DE-604.BV035641859 |
| illustrated | Not Illustrated |
| indexdate | 2024-12-20T13:39:34Z |
| institution | BVB |
| isbn | 9789048126132 9789048126149 |
| language | English |
| oai_aleph_id | oai:aleph.bib-bvb.de:BVB01-017696633 |
| oclc_num | 321018477 |
| open_access_boolean | |
| owner | DE-473 DE-BY-UBG DE-29 DE-12 DE-355 DE-BY-UBR |
| owner_facet | DE-473 DE-BY-UBG DE-29 DE-12 DE-355 DE-BY-UBR |
| physical | X, 231 S. 235 mm x 155 mm |
| publishDate | 2009 |
| publishDateSearch | 2009 |
| publishDateSort | 2009 |
| publisher | Springer |
| record_format | marc |
| series | Argumentation Library |
| series2 | Argumentation Library |
| spellingShingle | Eemeren, Frans H. van 1946- Garssen, Bart Meuffels, Bert Fallacies and judgments of reasonableness empirical research concerning the pragma-dialectical discussion rules Argumentation Library Fallacies (Logic) Persuasion (Rhetoric) Reasoning Fehlschluss (DE-588)4132069-4 gnd |
| subject_GND | (DE-588)4132069-4 |
| title | Fallacies and judgments of reasonableness empirical research concerning the pragma-dialectical discussion rules |
| title_auth | Fallacies and judgments of reasonableness empirical research concerning the pragma-dialectical discussion rules |
| title_exact_search | Fallacies and judgments of reasonableness empirical research concerning the pragma-dialectical discussion rules |
| title_full | Fallacies and judgments of reasonableness empirical research concerning the pragma-dialectical discussion rules Frans van Eemeren ; Bart Garssen ; Bert Meuffels |
| title_fullStr | Fallacies and judgments of reasonableness empirical research concerning the pragma-dialectical discussion rules Frans van Eemeren ; Bart Garssen ; Bert Meuffels |
| title_full_unstemmed | Fallacies and judgments of reasonableness empirical research concerning the pragma-dialectical discussion rules Frans van Eemeren ; Bart Garssen ; Bert Meuffels |
| title_short | Fallacies and judgments of reasonableness |
| title_sort | fallacies and judgments of reasonableness empirical research concerning the pragma dialectical discussion rules |
| title_sub | empirical research concerning the pragma-dialectical discussion rules |
| topic | Fallacies (Logic) Persuasion (Rhetoric) Reasoning Fehlschluss (DE-588)4132069-4 gnd |
| topic_facet | Fallacies (Logic) Persuasion (Rhetoric) Reasoning Fehlschluss |
| url | http://bvbr.bib-bvb.de:8991/F?func=service&doc_library=BVB01&local_base=BVB01&doc_number=017696633&sequence=000001&line_number=0001&func_code=DB_RECORDS&service_type=MEDIA |
| volume_link | (DE-604)BV012739610 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT eemerenfranshvan fallaciesandjudgmentsofreasonablenessempiricalresearchconcerningthepragmadialecticaldiscussionrules AT garssenbart fallaciesandjudgmentsofreasonablenessempiricalresearchconcerningthepragmadialecticaldiscussionrules AT meuffelsbert fallaciesandjudgmentsofreasonablenessempiricalresearchconcerningthepragmadialecticaldiscussionrules |