Abstract
In the process of argumentation, we not only provide reasons, but also ask questions. The questions we ask are used for several purposes.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
“The profile of dialogue represents a local sequence of moves that is one part of a longer sequence of moves in a goal directed conversational exchange of a certain kind between two parties” (Walton, 1999b, p. 2).
References
Asher, N., & Lascarides, A. (1998). Questions in dialogue. Linguistics and Philosophy, 21, 237–309.
Baskent, C. (Ed.). (2016). Perspectives on interrogative models of inquiry. Developments in inquiry and questions. Dordrecht: Springer.
Belnap, N. D., & Steel, T. P. (1976). The logic of Questions and Answers. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Bermejo-Luque, L. (2011). Giving reasons: A linguistic–pragmatic approach to argumentation theory. Dordrecht: Springer.
van Eemeren, F. H., & Grootendorst, R. (1984). Speech acts in argumentative discussions: A theoretical model for the analysis of discussions directed towards solving conflicts of opinion. Dordrecht: Foris.
van Eemeren, F. H., Houtlosser, P., & Snoeck Henkemans, A. F. (2007). Argumentative indicators in discourse. A pragma-dialectical study. Dordrecht: Springer.
Graesser, A. C., & Person, N. K. (1994). Question asking during tutoring. American Educational Research Journal, 31(1), 104–137.
Graesser, A. C., Person, N. K., & Huber, J. D. (1992). Mechanisms that generate questions. In T. E. Lauer, E. Peacock, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Questions and information systems (pp. 167–187). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Hamblin, Ch L. (1958). Questions. The Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 36, 159–168.
Harrell, M. (2016). What is the argument? An introduction to philosophical argument analysis. Cambridge (MA) & London: The MIT Press.
Hintikka, J. (2007). Socratic epistemology: Explorations of knowledge-seeking by questioning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Krabbe, E. C. W. (2006). Dialogue logic. In D. M. Gabbay & J. Woods (Eds.), Handbook of the history of logic, 7. Logic and the modalities in the twentieth century (pp. 665–704). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Marraud, H. (2013). ¿Es lógic@? Análisis y evaluación de argumentos. Madrid: Editorial Cátedra.
Marraud, H. (2017). Las siete maneras de argumentar. Quadripartita Ratio. Revista de Retórica y Argumentación, 4, 52–57.
Passmore, J. (1961). Philosophical reasoning. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons.
Perry, J. (1978). A dialogue on personal identity and immortality. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing.
Rescher, N. (1977). Dialectics. A controversy-oriented approach to the theory of knowledge. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Ryle, G. (2009). Collected essays 1929–1968. New York: Routledge.
Walton, D. (1989). Question-reply argumentation. New York: Praeger.
Walton, D. (1991). Critical faults and fallacies of questioning. Journal of Pragmatics, 15, 337–366.
Walton, D. (1992). Questionable questions in question period: Prospects for an informal logic of parliamentary discourse. In E. M. Barth & E. C. W. Krabbe (Eds.), Logic and political culture (pp. 87–95). Amsterdam: North-Holland.
Walton, D. (1997). Judging how heavily a question is loaded: A pragmatic method. Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines, 17(2), 53–71.
Walton, D. (1998). The new dialectic: Conversational contexts of argument. Toronto: University Press.
Walton, D. (1999a). The fallacy of many questions: On the notions of complexity, loadedness and unfair entrapment in interrogative theory. Argumentation, 13, 379–383.
Walton, D. (1999b). Profiles of dialogue for evaluating arguments from ignorance. Argumentation, 13, 53–71.
Williamson, T. (2015). Tetralogue. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Wiśniewski, A. (1995). The posing of questions: Logical foundations of erotetic inferences. Dordrecht: Springer.
Acknowledgements
This work has been made possible by a Ph.D. scholarship from CONACYT, scientific agency of the Mexican government.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Galindo, J. (2020). Dialogical Sequences, Argumentative Moves and Interrogative Burden of Proof in Philosophical Argumentation. In: van Eemeren, F., Garssen, B. (eds) From Argument Schemes to Argumentative Relations in the Wild. Argumentation Library, vol 35. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-28367-4_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-28367-4_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-28366-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-28367-4
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)