Emotion, Argumentation and Informal Logic

Michael A. Gilbert


Over the past 60 years there have been tremendous advances made in Argumentation Theory. One crucial advance has been the move from the investigation of static arguments to a concern with dialogic interactions in concrete contexts. This focus has entailed a slow shift toward involving both non-logical and non-discursive elements in the analysis of an argument. I argue that the traditional attitude Informal Logic has displayed toward emotion can be and ought be moderated. In particular, I examine the role of emotion in everyday argumentation, and how Informal Logic can encompass it alongside the more traditional logical mode of communication

Full Text:


DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.22329/il.v24i3.2147

ISSN: 0824-2577