Page 156 - Gabrijela Kišiček and Igor Ž. Žagar (eds.), What do we know about the world? Rhetorical and argumentative perspectives, Digital Library, Educational Research Institute, Ljubljana 2013
P. 156
What Do We Know about the World?
and responsibly manner if they are elected. Profiles can be an indicator
of future argumentation behaviour.
B. Value to political parties. Political parties will be interested in
their own profile as well as those of their opponents. This is especially so
if the public takes the view that they want their politicians to behave in
an intellectually responsible manner, they will want to know how they
can improve their own profile and how they can take advantage of their
opponents’ weaknesses as revealed in their profiles.
C. Value to argumentation workers. Profiles of parties (or individ-
ual politicians) can be tailored for consumption in the public media,
e.g., newspapers, radio, television, blogs, etc., either during a campaign
or shortly afterwards, as long as public interest endures. This is a way to
bring the work of argumentation workers to the attention of the public.
Walton and I have done this.5 To this end one will find using the broader
more intuitive categories like the dialectical roles, most suitable. In gen-
eral, the greater public doesn’t care to distinguish three kinds of ad hom-
inem arguments.
6. Externalities
Argumentation profiles can contribute directly to the quality of po-
litical life by providing information that is vital to political parties who
are argument agents, and to citizens who must evaluate those parties.
There are, in addition, a number of spin-offs, or externalities, of doing
argumentation profiles that can be felt within the academy.
D. Inter-disciplinary cooperation. Argumentation workers need the
cooperation of at least three other fields in order to make argumenta-
tion profiles sound and valuable. (1) These profiles will profit from be-
ing supplemented with communication factors which take into account
other components: tone of voice, posture, choice of language, etc; hence,
coordination with communication workers with complementary inter-
ests will make the argumentation profiles more valuable. (2) Our anal-
yses can be enriched by the participation of social psychologists, people
who study personality, group behaviour, and social cognition. (3) Creat-
ing profiles of political behaviour invites participation and cooperation
with colleagues in political studies. We should engage the cooperation of
workers from these other disciplines, but keep the argumentation profile
as the central, unifying component.
5 See Hansen and Walton (2012a).
and responsibly manner if they are elected. Profiles can be an indicator
of future argumentation behaviour.
B. Value to political parties. Political parties will be interested in
their own profile as well as those of their opponents. This is especially so
if the public takes the view that they want their politicians to behave in
an intellectually responsible manner, they will want to know how they
can improve their own profile and how they can take advantage of their
opponents’ weaknesses as revealed in their profiles.
C. Value to argumentation workers. Profiles of parties (or individ-
ual politicians) can be tailored for consumption in the public media,
e.g., newspapers, radio, television, blogs, etc., either during a campaign
or shortly afterwards, as long as public interest endures. This is a way to
bring the work of argumentation workers to the attention of the public.
Walton and I have done this.5 To this end one will find using the broader
more intuitive categories like the dialectical roles, most suitable. In gen-
eral, the greater public doesn’t care to distinguish three kinds of ad hom-
inem arguments.
6. Externalities
Argumentation profiles can contribute directly to the quality of po-
litical life by providing information that is vital to political parties who
are argument agents, and to citizens who must evaluate those parties.
There are, in addition, a number of spin-offs, or externalities, of doing
argumentation profiles that can be felt within the academy.
D. Inter-disciplinary cooperation. Argumentation workers need the
cooperation of at least three other fields in order to make argumenta-
tion profiles sound and valuable. (1) These profiles will profit from be-
ing supplemented with communication factors which take into account
other components: tone of voice, posture, choice of language, etc; hence,
coordination with communication workers with complementary inter-
ests will make the argumentation profiles more valuable. (2) Our anal-
yses can be enriched by the participation of social psychologists, people
who study personality, group behaviour, and social cognition. (3) Creat-
ing profiles of political behaviour invites participation and cooperation
with colleagues in political studies. We should engage the cooperation of
workers from these other disciplines, but keep the argumentation profile
as the central, unifying component.
5 See Hansen and Walton (2012a).
