Expository Thesis Statements vs Argumentative Thesis

[PDF] exemple introduction sujet de reflexion

[PDF] sujet de reflexion conclusion

[PDF] introduction argumentation bac francais

[PDF] argumentation juridique stmg

[PDF] problème juridique exemple

[PDF] argumentation juridique pdf

[PDF] argumentation juridique syllogisme

[PDF] evaluation emc 6eme vivre ensemble

[PDF] exemple d'argument

[PDF] 10 arguments pour la mondialisation

[PDF] texte argumentatif sur la mondialisation

[PDF] 10 arguments contre la mondialisation

[PDF] mondialisation effets positifs et négatifs

[PDF] opinion sur la mondialisation

[PDF] avancées scientifiques 2017

Expository Thesis Statements vs Argumentative Thesis

DISSOCIATION IN REASONING AND ARGUMENTATION

Takuzo Konishi

BA in Literature, Waseda University, 1994

Master of Arts in Communication, Wayne State University, 1999

Master

of Arts in Philosophy, University of Windsor, 2000

Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of

the Dietrich School of Arts and Sciences in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

Doctor of Philosophy in Communication

University of Pittsburgh

2014
ii

UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH

DIETRICH

SCHOOL OF ARTS AND SCIENCES

This dissertation was presented

Takuzo Konishi

It was defended on

February 20, 2014

and approved by

John Lyne, Professor, Department of Communication

E. Johanna Hartelius, Assistant Professor, Department of Communication Nicholas Rescher, Professor, Department of Philosophy

Merrilee

H. Salmon

, Emeritus Professor, Department of Philosophy

Dissertation Advisor:

Gordon R. Mitchell, Associate Professor, Department of

Communication

iii

Copyright © by Takuzo Konishi

2014
iv This dissertation inquires into the nature of dissociation - a maneuver through which a single entity is subdivided and arranged according to a hierarchy - as proposed by Chaim Perelman and Lucie Olbrechts-Tyteca. Drawing on their New Rhetoric Project, Perelman's regressive philosophy, and research on argumentation schemes, I develop ways of conceptualizing, analyzing, and appraising dissociation as it is utilized in reasoning and argument in natural language. I first examine Chaim Perelman's regressive philosophy to better situate argumentation in relation to demonstration, then delineate the Project's framework of argumentation as constituted by a speaker, an audience, and an argumentative discourse.

Argumentation is defined here as a symbolic act

increasing audience members' epistemic adherence to a thesis, based on their adherence to the premise and the scheme's changing of their "level of adherence." Additionally, I conceptualize dissociation in relation to association, breaking links, and what I call "re-confirming connecting links." In the process of conceptualization, I defend the position that dissociation and three other categories of argument contain, but are not reducible to, argumentation schemes proper. Based on the four-partite category of argument and the premise-scheme-thesis structure, I analyze eight examples of dissociation and validate the notion that dissociation makes use of various argumentation schemes proper in advancing definitive theses, subdividing an entity, and arranging the subdivided entities according to a hierarchy. Building upon the analysis of dissociation, I explore

DISSOCIATION IN REASONING AND ARGUMENTATION

Takuzo Konishi, PhD

University of Pittsburgh, 2014

v ways in which to appraise dissociation by incorporating regressive philosophy, critical questions, and universal audience. Principles of regressive philo sophy remind the critic that argumentation challenges the totality of experience in the rhetorical situation, never achieves certainty, and leaves room for revision. Critical questions address specific points that dissociation must answer in order to count as a "cogent" argument. The universal audience, anchored in particular audience members, must be constructed to maintain the balance between normative orientations of appraisal as well as realistic expectations of the rhetorical situation. Besides advancing our understanding of dissociation, this dissertation contributes to a richer understanding of the New Rhetoric Project, defends relativism in argumentation, and emphasizes the significance of production as well as appraisal of argument. vi TABLE OF CONTENTS

PREFACE ..................................................................................................................................... X

1.0

INTRODUCTION

1 1.

1 REVIEW OF RELEVANT LITERATURE ..................................................... 3

1.2 RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND THEIR SIGNIFICANCE ......................... 25

1.3 OVERVIEW OF CHAPTER STRUCTURE .................................................. 29

2.0 ARGUMENTATION IN THE NEW RHETORIC PROJECT ......................................... 32

2.1 CHAIM PERELMAN'S THEORY OF JUSTICE, PRACTICAL

PHILOSOPHY, REGRESSIVE PHILOSOPHY AND LEGAL STUDIES ................. 32

2.2 THE FRAMEWORK OF ARGUMENTATION AND COMPONENTS OF

AN ARGUMENT ................................................................................................................ 40

2.3 OBJECTIONS AND REPLIES ........................................................................ 55

2.4 SUMMARY OF THE CHAPTER ................................................................... 57

3.0 CLASSIFYING ARGUMENTATION SCHEMES IN THE NEW RHETORICquotesdbs_dbs2.pdfusesText_2

[PDF] Expository Thesis Statements vs Argumentative Thesis

Argumentation Critical Thinking And The Postgraduate Dissertation

Dissertation argumentative