Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Reasonableness and Effectiveness in Argumentative Discourse pp 381–401Cite as

Strategic Maneuvering: Examining Argumentation in Context

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: Argumentation Library ((ARGA,volume 27))

Abstract

The pragma-dialectical theory of argumentation developed by van Eemeren and Grootendorst (Speech acts in argumentative discussions: A theoretical model for the analysis of discussions directed towards solving conflicts of opinion. De Gruyter/Foris, Berlin/Dordrecht, 1984), (Argumentation, communication, and fallacies: A pragma-dialectical perspective. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, 1992), (A systematic theory of argumentation. The pragma-dialectical approach. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 2004) enables the analyst of argumentative discourse to make a theoretically motivated reconstruction of the discourse that results in an “analytic overview” of all elements that are pertinent to a critical.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  • Agricola, R. (1479/1967). De inventione libri tres. A translation of selected chapters by J. R. McNally. Speech Monographs, 34, 393–422.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andone. (2009). Accusing someone of an inconsistency as a confrontational way of strategic manoeuvring. In: F. H. van Eemeren (Ed.), Scrutinizing argumentation in context: Fifteen studies on strategic maneuvering. Dordrecht: Springer, Chapter 9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anscombre, J.-C. (1994). La nature des topoï. In J.-C. Anscombre (Ed.), La théorie des topoï (pp. 49–84). Paris: Editions Kimé.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anscombre, J.-C., & Ducrot, O. (1983). L’Argumentation dans la langue [Argumentation in Language]. Liège: Pierre Mardaga.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aristotle. (1960). Topica (E. S. Forster, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aristotle. (1965). On sophistical refutations. On coming-to-be and Passing away (E. S. Forster, Trans.). On the cosmos (D. J. Furley, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press/London: W. Heineman. (1st printed 1955).

    Google Scholar 

  • Aristotle. (1991). On Rhetoric: A theory of civic discourse. Edi. With introduction by G. A. Kennedy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barth, E. M., & Krabbe, E. C. W. (1982). From axiom to dialogue: A philosophical study of logics and argumentation. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Boethius. (1978). De topicis differentiis (With notes and essays on the text by E. Stump, Trans.). Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cicero. (1942). In E. W. Sutton, & H. Rackham (Eds.), De oratore. London: W. Heineman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fahnestock, J. (1999). Rhetorical figures in science. New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fahnestock, J. (2009). Quid Pro Nobis. Rhetorical stylistics for argument analysis. In F. H. van Eemeren (Ed.), Scrutinizing argumentation in context: fifteen studies on strategic maneuvering. Dordrecht: Springer, Chapter 11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feteris, E. T. (2009). Strategic maneuvering with the intention of the legislator in the justification of judicial decisions. In: F. H. van Eemeren (Ed.), Scrutinizing argumentation in context: Fifteen studies on strategic maneuvering. Dordrecht: Springer, Chapter 6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaonkar, D. P. (1990). Rhetoric and its double: Reflections on the rhetorical turn in the human sciences. In H. W. Simons (Ed.), The rhetorical turn: Invention and persuasion in the conduct of inquiry (pp. 341–366). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodnight. (2009). Strategic maneuvering in direct to consumer drug advertising: A study in argumentation theory and new institutional theory. In: F. H. van Eemeren (Ed.), Scrutinizing argumentation in context: fifteen studies on strategic maneuvering. Dordrecht: Springer, Chapter 5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamblin, C. L. (1970). Fallacies. London: Methuen. Reprinted at Newport News: Vale Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ieţcu-Fairclough, I. (2009). Legitimation and strategic maneuvering in the political field. In: F. H. van Eemeren (Ed.), Scrutinizing argumentation in context: fifteen studies on strategic maneuvering. Dordrecht: Springer, Chapter 8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, S. (1995). Fallacies and heuristics. In: F. H. van Eemeren, R. Grootendorst, J. A. Blair & C. A. Willard (Eds.), Analysis and evaluation. Proceedings of the third ISSA conference on argumentation. Vol. II (pp. 257–269). Amsterdam: Sic Sat.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacobs, C. S. (2007). Nonfallacious rhetorical strategies: Lyndon Johnson’s Daisy Ad. Argumentation, 20(4), 421–424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kauffeld, F. (2002). Pivotal issues and norms in rhetorical theories of argumentation. In F. H. van Eemeren & P. Houtlosser (Eds.), Dialectic and rhetoric: The warp and woof of argumentation analysis (pp. 97–118). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy, G. A. (1994). A new history of classical rhetoric. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kienpointner, M. (2006). How to present fallacious messages persuasively: The case of the “Nigeria Spam Letters”. In P. Houtlosser & M. A. van Rees (Eds.), Consideing pragma-dialectics (pp. 161–173). Mahwah, N.J./London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kienpointner, M. (2009). Plausible and fallacious Strategies to silence one’s opponent. In: F. H. van Eemeren (Ed.), Scrutinizing argumentation in context: Fifteen studies on strategic maneuvering. Dordrecht: Springer, Chapter 4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krabbe, E. C. W. (2002). Meeting in the house of Callias: An historical perspective on rhetoric and dialectic. In F. H. van Eemeren & P. Houtlosser (Eds.), Dialectic and rhetoric: The warp and woof of argumentation analysis (pp. 29–40). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Leeman, A. D. (1992). Rhetoric versus argumentation theory. In F. H. van Eemeren, R. Grootendorst, J. A. Blair, & C. A. Willard (Eds.), Argumentation illuminated (pp. 12–22). Amsterdam: Sic Sat.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leff, M. (2002). The relation between rhetoric and dialectic in a classical and a modern perspective. In F. H. van Eemeren & P. Houtlosser (Eds.), Dialectic and rhetoric: The warp and woof of argumentation analysis (pp. 53–63). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Leff, M. (2006). Rhetoric, dialectic, and the functions of argument. In P. Houtlosser & M. A. van Rees (Eds.), Considering pragma-dialectics (pp. 199–209). Mahwah, N.J./London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mack, P. (1993). Renaissance argument: valla and agricola in the traditions of rhetoric and dialectic. Leiden: Brill.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Meerhoff, C. G. (1988). Agricola et Ramus: dialectique et rhétorique. In F. Akkerman & A. J. Vanderjagt (Eds.), Rodolphus Agricola Phrisius 1444-1485 (pp. 270–280). Leiden: Brill.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Mohammed, D. (2009). Manoeuvring strategically in Prime Minister’s Question Time. In: F. H. van Eemeren (Ed.), Scrutinizing argumentation in context: Fifteen studies on strategic maneuvering. Dordrecht: Springer, Chapter 10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, J. J., & Katula, R. A. (Eds.) (1994). A synoptic history of classical rhetoric. Davis, CA: Hermagoras Press (Originally published 1972).

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Keefe (2009). Persuasive effects of strategic maneuvering. Some findings from meta-analyses of experimental persuasion effects research. In: F. H. van Eemeren (Ed.), Scrutinizing argumentation in context: fifteen studies on strategic maneuvering. Dordrecht: Springer, Chapter 15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perelman, Ch., & Olbrechts-Tyteca, L. (1969). The new rhetoric: A treatise on argumentation (Translation of La nouvelle rhétorique: Traité de l’argumentation. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1958). Notre Dame/London: University of Notre Dame Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Plato (1914). Phaedrus (H. N. Fowler, Trans.). Cambridge, M. A.: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quintilian, (1920). The Institutio Oratoria of Quintilian. London: W. Heineman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reboul, O. (1989). The figure and the argument. In M. Meyer (Ed.), From metaphysics to rhetoric (pp. 169–181). Dordrecht: Kluwer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Rees, M. A. van (2009). Strategic manoeuvring with dissociation. In: F. H. van Eemeren (Ed.), Scrutinizing argumentation in context: Fifteen studies on strategic maneuvering. Dordrecht: Springer, Chapter 2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rigotti, (2006). Relevance of context-bound loci to topical potential in the argumentation stage. Argumentation, 20(4), 519–540.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rocci, A. (2009). Manoeuvring with tropes. The case of the metaphorical polyphonic and framing of arguments. In: F. H. van Eemeren (Ed.), Scrutinizing argumentation in context: Fifteen studies on strategic maneuvering. Dordrecht: Springer, Chapter 14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schulz, P., & Rubinelli, S. (2008). Arguing “for” the patient: Informed consent and strategic maneuvering in doctor-patient interaction. Argumentation, 22(3), 423–432.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simons, H. W. (1990). The rhetoric of inquiry as an intellectual movement. In H. W. Simons (Ed.), The rhetorical turn: Invention and persuasion in the conduct of inquiry (pp. 1–31). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Snoeck Henkemans, A. F. (2009). The use of praeteritio in strategic manoeuvring.. In: F. H. van Eemeren (Ed.), Scrutinizing argumentation in context: Fifteen studies on strategic maneuvering. Dordrecht: Springer, Chapter 13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tindale, Ch W. (2004). Rhetorical argumentation: Principles of theory and practice. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tindale, Ch. W. (2009). Constrained maneuvering: Rhetoric as a rational enterprise. In: F. H. van Eemeren (Ed.), Scrutinizing argumentation in context: Fifteen studies on strategic maneuvering. Dordrecht: Springer, Chapter 3.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tonnard, Y. (2009). The right words for a topic shift: How the choice of presentational means can be effective in strategic manoeuvring. In: F. H. van Eemeren (Ed.), Scrutinizing argumentation in context: Fifteen studies on strategic maneuvering. Dordrecht: Springer, Chapter 12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Toulmin, S. E. (2001). Return to reason. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Eemeren, F. H., & Garssen, B. J. (Eds.). (2008). Controversy and confrontation. Relating controversy analysis with argumentation theory. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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. Berlin/Dordrecht: De Gruyter/Foris.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • van Eemeren, F. H., & Grootendorst, R. (1992). Argumentation, communication, and fallacies: A pragma-dialectical perspective. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Eemeren, F. H., & Grootendorst, R. (2004). A systematic theory of argumentation. The pragma-dialectical approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Eemeren, F. H., Grootendorst, R., Jackson, S., & Jacobs, S. (1993). Reconstructing argumentative discourse. Tuscaloosa and London: The University of Alabama Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Eemeren, F. H., & Houtlosser, P. (2002). Strategic maneuvering: Maintaining a delicate balance. In F. H. van Eemeren & P. Houtlosser (Eds.), Dialectic and rhetoric: The warp and woof of argumentation analysis. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • van Eemeren, F. H., & Houtlosser, P. (2003). Fallacies as derailments of strategic maneuvering: The argumentum ad verecundiam, a case in point. In: F. H. van Eemeren, J. A. Blair, Ch. A. Willard & A. F. Snoeck Henkemans (Eds.), Proceedings of the Fifth Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation (pp. 289–292). Amsterdam: Sic Sat.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Eemeren, F. H., & Houtlosser, P. (2004). More about fallacies as derailments of strategic maneuvering: The case of tu quoque. In: H. V. Hansen, Ch. W. Tindale, J. A. Blair, R. H. Johnson, & R. C. Pinto (Eds.), Argumentation and its applications. Informal Logic @ 25. CD ROM. ISBN 0-9683461-2-X-3-8.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Eemeren, F. H., & Houtlosser, P. (2005). Theoretical construction and argumentative reality: An analytic model of critical discussion and conventionalised types of argumentative activity. In: D. Hitchcock, & D. Farr (Eds.), The uses of argument. Proceedings of a conference at McMaster University (pp. 75–84), May 18–21, 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Eemeren, F. H., & Houtlosser, P. (2008a). Rhetoric in a dialectical framework: Fallacies as derailments of strategic manoeuvring. In E. Weigand (Ed.), Dialogue and rhetoric (pp. 133–151). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • van Eemeren, F. H. & Houtlosser, P. (2008b). Seizing the occasion: Parameters for analysing ways of strategic manoeuvring. In: F.H. van Eemeren, & B. Garssen (Eds.), Pondering on problems of argumentation. Twenty essays on theoretical issues (pp. 3–14). Amsterdam: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Eemeren, F. H. (2010). Strategic maneuvering in argumentative discourse. An extended pragma-dialectical theory. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wenzel, J. W. (1990). Three perspectives on argument: Rhetoric, dialectic, logic. In R. Trapp & J. Schuetz (Eds.), Perspectives on argumentation: Essays in the honor of wayne brockriede (pp. 9–26). Prospect Heights, Ill: Waveland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walton, D. N., & Krabbe, E. C. W. (1995). Commitment in dialogue: Basic concepts of interpersonal reasoning. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zarefsky, D. (2006a). Strategic maneuvering through persuasive definitions: Implications for dialectic and rhetoric. Argumentation, 20(4), 399–416.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zarefsky, D. (2006b). The ten rules of pragma-dialectics and validity in argumentation. In P. Houtlosser & M. A. van Rees (Eds.), Considering pragma-dialectics (pp. 313–323). Mahwah, N.J./London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zarefksy, D. (2009). Strategic maneuvering in political argumentation. In: F. H. van Eemeren (Ed.), Scrutinizing argumentation in context: Fifteen studies on strategic maneuvering. Dordrecht: Springer, Chapter 7.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Speech Communication, Argumentation Theory and Rhetoric, Faculty of Humanities, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Frans H. van Eemeren & Peter Houtlosser

Authors
  1. Frans H. van Eemeren
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Peter Houtlosser
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Frans H. van Eemeren .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

van Eemeren, F.H., Houtlosser, P. (2015). Strategic Maneuvering: Examining Argumentation in Context. In: Reasonableness and Effectiveness in Argumentative Discourse. Argumentation Library, vol 27. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-20955-5_19

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation