Publication Details

Abstract

The paper primarily aims at providing a critical assessment of the ideas and arguments presented in a paper by Marián Zouhar that was published in Filozofia 2020/8. It shows that Zouhar’s criticism of the adequacy of the definition of argumentation commonly accepted in Pragma-Dialectical Theory is not convincing and the alternative definition which he offers is at least as controversial as the definition which is the target of his critique. The paper also points out that Zouhar’s ambition of providing a comprehensive analytic definition of the concept of argumentation is dubious. It also suggests that we should instead aspire to proffer specific delineations of the concept of argumentation designed to serve well within individual research projects focused on social practices involving argumentation.