本文選題：語(yǔ)用論辯學(xué)　切入點(diǎn)：批判性討論　出處：《湖北大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)版)》2017年05期 　論文類型：期刊論文

【摘要】：語(yǔ)用論辯學(xué)為分析評(píng)價(jià)論證提供了一種跨學(xué)科融合方法。為了評(píng)價(jià)論證,語(yǔ)用論辯學(xué)家以功能化、社會(huì)化、外在化和論辯化作為元理論起點(diǎn),把批判性討論作為理想模型,給出了一組論證合理性評(píng)價(jià)的批判性討論規(guī)則。從1990年代開(kāi)始,為了公正處理論證者試圖追求論辯合理性與修辭實(shí)效性之間保持一種微妙平衡,語(yǔ)用論辯學(xué)從功能上整合了修辭視角,提出了"策略操控"理論框架。從語(yǔ)用論辯學(xué)觀點(diǎn)來(lái)看,每個(gè)論證話步都是策略操控的結(jié)果,而謬誤則是策略操控脫軌。
[Abstract]:Pragmatic argumentation provides an interdisciplinary fusion method for the analysis and evaluation of argumentation. In order to evaluate the argumentation, pragmatic argumentalists take functionalization, socialization, externalization and argumentation as the starting point of the meta-theory, and regard critical discussion as the ideal model. This paper presents a set of critical discussion rules for the evaluation of argumentation rationality. Since the 1990s, in order to justly deal with the argument's attempts to maintain a delicate balance between the reasonableness of argument and the effectiveness of rhetoric, Pragmatics integrates the rhetorical perspective from a functional point of view and puts forward the theoretical framework of "strategic manipulation". From the point of view of pragmatic argumentation, every argument step is the result of strategy manipulation, while the fallacy is the derailment of strategy manipulation.
【作者單位】： 江蘇大學(xué)國(guó)際論辯研究院;中山大學(xué)邏輯與認(rèn)知研究所;
【分類號(hào)】：H030

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 汪珊;漢語(yǔ)添加小品詞“也”的語(yǔ)義研究[D];四川外國(guó)語(yǔ)大學(xué);2017年

，

本文編號(hào)：1610380