Dispute as a special case of argumentation, Introduction, Dispute...

Dispute as a special case of argumentation

Introduction

Polemic only in this case will benefit if it finds out what the differences are, how deep they are, whether it is a disagreement on the merits or disagreement on particular issues.

In. I. Lenin

In practice, people constantly solve important problems, find out opinions, assess moods, possible actions of others, and so on. These contacts occur in the form of conversation, mutual exchange of information, verbal expression of points of view. However, human communication is not only the unity of thought and action, but also the struggle of opinions, disputes. Dispute as a form of communication is of great importance in the life of a person. The historical roots of the art of controversy lie in antiquity. Even ancient Indian logicians highly valued such traits of the participants in the dispute as the ability to find mistakes in the opponent's statements, the ability to quickly understand what the opponent wanted to say, quickly get to know his thoughts and find answers, not get irritated in the process of arguing, avoid rudeness, etc. . The ancient Sophists put forward the idea that two opposing views can be expressed about each phenomenon and it is important to justify and prove one's rightness. Aristotle considered the questions of the dispute in connection with rhetoric, logic and dialectics. Attempts to generalize the theoretical and practical methods of the dispute were made in the XIX century. - the work of A. Schopenhauer, "Eristics, or the art of arguing," where various techniques of dispute and a variety of tricks were considered to create the appearance of a dispute and the proof of the truth.

Dispute, its types and conditions of reference

What is a dispute? For the answer, let's look at definitions in dictionaries.

In the United States Explanatory Dictionary under the editorship of DN Ushakov, the dispute is defined as "mutual wrangling, verbal (oral or written) competition, in which each side defends its opinion, proves its rightness." This definition can be considered ordinary, i.e. sufficiently wide. In fact, although it is true, it does not reveal the logical nature of the dispute.

In the Logical Dictionary-Directory NI Kondakova, as one should expect, the emphasis is on the logical component, namely, on the evidence of arguments: "Dispute is the proof of the truth of something in the course of which each side defends its understanding of the issue under discussion and refutes the opponent's opinion." Dannos definition is narrow, because disputes are not always for the sake of truth, and not always they are conclusive.

In our opinion, a successful definition of the term "dispute" given by AA Ivin and AL Nikiforov in the "Dictionary of Logic":

The dispute is a clash of opinions or positions, during which the parties give arguments in support of their beliefs and criticize the incompatible views of the other party with the latter. The dispute is a particular case of argumentation, its most acute and tense form. "

What is the sharpness and intensity of the dispute? We know that there are strong ways of argumentation - proof and refutation (as a complete, exhaustive justification of the truth or falsity of utterances) and are "weak" - confirmation and criticism (partial justification of the truth or falsity of the thesis). Of course, the severity and intensity of the dispute can be determined by the strength of the argument, but not necessarily. Most likely, here the decisive role is played by the clash of opinions or positions, and the arguments of the parties can be both strong and weak.

The main figures in the dispute are his direct participants, - the opponent and the opponent.

Proponent (from Latin suggest, I represent) - a person offering something for discussion; defender, supporter. It is he who asks the topic of the dispute.

Opponent (from Latin opponentis - opposing, objecting) - opponent in dispute.

>

In some types of dispute, there is a arbiter (from the Latin arbiter) - an uninterested intermediary called to resolve the dispute two sides. He acts as the organizer of the dispute.

The mediator of the dispute is the audience - listeners in the process of discussing the problem.

If you take the actual logical component of the dispute, then in its composition, you can select the following elements:

1) thesis and antithesis (more broadly - the system of statements as a matter of dispute);

2) the arguments of the parties for and against (arguments and counterarguments);

3) fields of argumentation - no doubts or even acceptable arguments, methods of reasoning, fundamental principles (only subject disputes are possible when they are agreed);

4) The argument itself is a demonstration of the connection between the arguments and the thesis (or counterargument - the identification of flaws in the thesis, arguments and the connection of arguments with the thesis on the opposing side).

thematic pictures

Also We Can Offer!

Other services that we offer

If you don’t see the necessary subject, paper type, or topic in our list of available services and examples, don’t worry! We have a number of other academic disciplines to suit the needs of anyone who visits this website looking for help.

How to ...

We made your life easier with putting together a big number of articles and guidelines on how to plan and write different types of assignments (Essay, Research Paper, Dissertation etc)