Argumentation Aug 2014 Open Access

Processing Topics from the Beneficial Cognitive Model in Partially and Over-Successful Persuasion Dialogues

Kamila Debowska-Kozlowska

Abstract

A persuasion dialogue is a dialogue in which a conflict between agents with respect to their points of view arises at the beginning of the talk and the agents have the shared, global goal of resolving the conflict and at least one agent has the persuasive aim to convince the other party to accept an opposing point of view. I argue that the persuasive force of argument may have not only extreme values but also intermediate strength. That is, I wish to introduce two additional types of the effects of persuasion in addition to successful and unsuccessful ones (cf. Van Eemeren and Houtlosser in Argumentation 14(3):293–305, 2000; Advances in pragma-dialectics. Sic Sat, Amsterdam, 2002; Walton in A pragmatic theory of fallacy. University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa, 1995; Walton and Krabbe in Commitment in dialogue: basic concepts of interpersonal reasoning. State University of New York Press, Albany, New York, 1995). I propose a model which provides for modified versions of the standpoint of an agent needed in order to bring about two possible outcomes of a persuasion dialogue. These two outcomes I label partially-successful and over-successful. I call the potential, not yet verbalised, standpoint of an agent here the original topic t. Based on some aspects of relevance theory (Sperber and Wilson in Relevance: communication and cognition. Blackwell, Oxford, 1986; Wilson and Sperber in The handbook of pragmatics. Blackwell Publishing, Malden, 2006), I explain that the modified version of the original topic t is an implicature created from the original topic t and from a specific mental topic which belongs to, what I call the beneficial cognitive model (hence BCM). I define BCMi,t as a set of topics which are within the area of agent i’s interest of persuasion with respect to t.

Journal
Argumentation
Published
2014-08-01
DOI
10.1007/s10503-014-9323-5
CompPile
Open Access
OA PDF Hybrid
Topics
discourse analysis argument
Export
BibTeX RIS

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (5)

  1. Dębowska-Kozłowska et al. (2022)
    “Agreement Builds and Disagreement Destroys:” How Polish Undergraduates and Gra…
    Argumentation
  2. Budzynska et al. (2014)
    The Polish School of Argumentation: A Manifesto
    Argumentation
  3. Kacprzak et al. (2014)
    Dialogue Protocols for Formal Fallacies
    Argumentation
  4. Budzynska et al. (2014)
    Non-Inferential Aspects of Ad Hominem and Ad Baculum
    Argumentation
  5. Paglieri (2014)
    Nothing Persuades Like Success: Reflections on Partially and Over-Successful Pe…
    Argumentation

References (42) · 4 in this index

  1. Aristotle. 1955. The organon. Vol. 1: Prior analytics. (Translated by Harold P. Cooke and Hugh Tredennick; 1s…
  2. Aristotle. 1959. The art of rhetoric. (Translated by John Henry Freese; 1st standard edition in Greek by Andr…
  3. Katarzyna Budzynska (2008)
    Budzynska, Katarzyna, and Magdalena Kacprzak. 2008. A logic for reasoning about persuasion. Fundamenta Inform…
    Fundamenta Informaticae  ↗
  4. Budzynska, Katarzyna, and Magdalena Kacprzak. 2011. Model checking of persuasion in multi-agent systems. In S…
  5. Katarzyna Budzynska (2010)
    Aspects of semantics and pragmatics of dialogue
Show all 42 →
  1. Budzynska et al. (2014)
    Non-Inferential Aspects of Ad Hominem and Ad Baculum
    Argumentation
  2. Piotr Cap (2010)
    Cap, Piotr. 2010. Pragmatics, micropragmatics macropragmatics. Lodz Papers in Pragmatics 6(2): 195–228.
    Lodz Papers in Pragmatics
  3. Robyn Carston (2002)
    Thoughts and utterances: The pragmatics of explicit communication
     ↗
  4. Cristiano Castelfranchi (2007)
    Castelfranchi, Cristiano, and Fabio Paglieri. 2007. The role of beliefs in goal dynamics: Prolegomena to a co…
    Synthese  ↗
  5. Debowska, Kamila, Paweł Łoziński, and Chris Reed. 2009. Building bridges between everyday argument and formal…
  6. Bart Garssen (2001)
    Crucial concepts in argumentation theory
  7. Paul Herbert Grice (1989)
    Studies in the way of words
  8. Paul Herbert Grice (1975)
    Syntax and semantics. Vol. 3: Speech acts
  9. Hamblin, Charles L. 1970. Fallacies. London: Methuen. [Reprinted, 1993], Virginia: Vale Press.
  10. Peter Houtlosser (2001)
    Crucial concepts in argumentation theory
  11. Kacprzak et al. (2014)
    Dialogue Protocols for Formal Fallacies
    Argumentation
  12. Tamar Katriel (1989)
    From sign to text: A semiotic view of communication
     ↗
  13. Roman Kopytko (2002)
    The mental aspects of pragmatic theory
  14. George Lakoff (1987)
    Women, fire, and dangerous things
     ↗
  15. Daniel J O’Keefe (2002)
    Persuasion: Theory and research
  16. Fabio Paglieri (2010)
    Paglieri, Fabio, and Castelfranchi Cristiano. 2010. Why arguing? Towards a costs-benefits analysis of argumen…
    Argument and Computation  ↗
  17. Perelman, Chaim and Lucie Olbrechts-Tyteca. 1969. The new rhetoric: A treatise on argumentation. (Translated …
  18. Rigotti, Eddo. 2007. Can classical topics be revived within the contemporary theory of argumentation? In Proc…
  19. Rigotti et al. (2010)
    Comparing the Argumentum Model of Topics to Other Contemporary Approaches to Ar…
    Argumentation
  20. John Searle (1970)
    Speech acts: An essay in the philosophy of language
  21. Dan Sperber (1986)
    Relevance: Communication and cognition
  22. Frans H Eemeren van (2001)
    Crucial concepts in argumentation theory
     ↗
  23. van Eemeren, Frans H. 2009. Strategic Manoeuvring Between Rhetorical Effectiveness and Dialectical Reasonable…
  24. Frans H Eemeren van (1984)
    Speech acts in argumentative discussions
     ↗
  25. Frans H Eemeren van (1992)
    Argumentation, communication, and fallacies. A pragma-dialectical perspective
  26. Frans H Eemeren van (2004)
    A Systematic theory of argumentation: The pragma-dialectical approach
  27. Eemeren et al. (2000)
    Rhetorical Analysis Within a Pragma-Dialectical Framework
    Argumentation
  28. Frans H Eemeren van (2002)
    Advances in pragma- dialectics
  29. van Eemeren, Frans H. and Peter Houtlosser. 2004. A pragma-dialectical analysis of the burden of proof. [Unpu…
  30. Frans H Eemeren van (1993)
    Reconstructing argumentative discourse
  31. Ewa Walaszewska (2012)
    Relevance theory: More than understanding
  32. Douglas Walton (1995)
    A pragmatic theory of fallacy
  33. Douglas Walton (1995)
    Commitment in dialogue: Basic concepts of interpersonal reasoning
  34. Deirdre Wilson (1994)
    Language and understanding
  35. Deirdre Wilson (2000)
    Metarepresentations: A multidisciplinary perspective
     ↗
  36. Deirdre Wilson (2006)
    The handbook of pragmatics (2nd edition, 1st edition 2004.)
  37. Francisco Yus (2006)
    Encyclopedia of language and linguistics
CrossRef global citation count: 5 View in citation network → Build reading path →

Related Articles

  1. Argumentation Apr 2026
    A Normative Pragmatic Inquiry into the Volatility of Norms in Argumentation ↗
    Sally Jackson
    discourse analysis argument qualitative research public rhetoric
  2. Res Rhetorica Apr 2026
    Logos in ancient Greek discourse on rhetoric: An overview ↗
    Arkadiusz Sokolnicki
    classical rhetoric rhetorical criticism discourse analysis argument
  3. Argumentation Mar 2026
    Experimental Insights into the Influence of Logic and Pragmatics on Conditional Argument Evaluation ↗
    Ermioni Seremeta; Monique Flecken; Menno Reijven; Jean Wagemans
    discourse analysis argument assessment
  4. Poroi Feb 2026
    Using Stasis Theory as a Heuristic for Examining Epistemological Dilemmas in a Post-Truth Landscape ↗
    Bruce Bowles
    classical rhetoric modern rhetorical theory rhetorical criticism discourse analysis argument
  5. Argumentation Feb 2026
    When Emmanuel Macron Goes Social: Using Social Media Influencers as a Rhetorical Strategy ↗
    Keren Sadoun-Kerber
    rhetorical criticism discourse analysis argument collaborative writing social media affect and writing