Abstract

AbstractCritical questions have been understood in the framework of argument schemes from their conception. This understanding has influenced the process of evaluating arguments and the development of classifications. This paper argues that relating these two notions is detrimental to research on argument schemes and critical questions, and that it is possible to have critical questions without relying on argument schemes. Two objections are raised against the classical understanding of critical questions based on theoretical and analytical grounds. The theoretical objection presents the assumptions that are embedded in the idea of argument schemes delivering questions to evaluate arguments. The analytical objection, on the other hand, exposes the shortcomings of the theory when critical questions are used to evaluate real-life argumentation. After presenting these criticisms, a new theory of critical questions is sketched. This theory takes into account the dynamics of dialectical discussions to describe the function of critical questions and their implications for evaluating arguments.

Journal
Argumentation
Published
2023-09-01
DOI
10.1007/s10503-023-09613-w
CompPile
Open Access
OA PDF Hybrid
Topics
Export

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (1)

  1. Argumentation

References (28) · 2 in this index

  1. Anonymized
  2. Aristotle. 1926. The art of rhetoric (trans. Freese, J.H.). Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA.
  3. Aristotle. 1960. Topics (trans. Forster, E.S.). Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA.
  4. Argumentation
  5. Bush, G.W. 2003. President George Bush discusses Iraq in national press conference. The White House. Presiden…
Show all 28 →
  1. Cantalamessa, E. (2021, August). Democracy is sentimental. Aeon. https://aeon.co/essays/democracy-should-be-s…
  2. Dutilh Novaes, C. 2020. The role of trust in argumentation. Informal Logic 40(2): 205–236. https://doi.org/10…
    Informal Logic  
  3. Gascón, J.Á. 2016. Virtue and arguers. Topoi 35(2): 441–450.
    Topoi  
  4. A practical study of argument
  5. A reformulation of the modes of reasoning in argumentation
  6. Hernández, A. 2021. Journalists’ moves in political press conferences and their implications for accountabili…
    Journal of Argumentation in Context  
  7. Evaluating the language of argument
  8. Manifest rationality: a pragmatic theory of argument
  9. Marraud, H. 2015. Do arguers dream of logical standards? Arguers’ dialectic vs. arguments’ dialectic. Revista…
  10. From argument schemes to argumentative relations in the wild
  11. The new rhetoric: A treatise on argumentation
  12. Inference in Argumentation: A topics-based approach to argument schemes
  13. Ars topica: the classical technique of constructing arguments from Aristotle to Cicero
  14. The uses of argument
  15. Strategic maneuvering in argumentative discourse
  16. Prototypical argumentative patterns
  17. Argumentation theory: a pragma-dialectical perspective
  18. A systematic theory of argumentation: the pragma-dialectical approach
  19. Argumentation: analysis and evaluation
  20. Wagemans, J. 2016. Constructing a periodic table of arguments. In Argumentation, objectivity, and bias: Proce…
  21. Anyone who has a view. Argumentation library
  22. Argumentation schemes
  23. Argumentation