Practical Argumentation as Reasoned Advocacy

Marcin Lewiński

Abstract


The paper offers a theoretical investigation into the sources of normativity in practical argumentation. The chief question is: Do we need objectively-minded, unbiased arguers or can we count on “good” argumentative processes in which individual biases cancel each other out? I address this question by analysing a detailed structure of practical argument and its varieties, and by discussing the tenets of a comparative approach to practical reason. I argue that given the comparative structure proposed, reasoned advocacy in argumentative activity upholds reasonableness whenever that activity is adequately designed. I propose some basic rules for such a design of practical argumentation.


Keywords


advocacy, argumentation, comparativism, deliberation, polylogue, practical argument

Full Text:

PDF


DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.22329/il.v37i2.4775

ISSN: 0824-2577