Abstract
This essay offers, as a counterpart to pragma-dialectical argument, a “new rhetoric” produced in the situated discourse of a public forum when a community addresses matters of common urgency and undertakes informed action. Such a rhetoric takes the principles of discourse ethics as its informing dialectic by identifying an interlocutor as one who is obligatedboth to argue effectively,and also to hold open, even reinforce, norms of communicative reason. Implications concerning the study of fallacies and theethos obligations of communicative reasoning are discussed.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Alexy, Robert: 1990, “A Theory of Practical Discourse”, in:The Communicative Ethics Controversy, Seyla Benhabib and Fred Dallmayr (eds.), Cambridge, MIT Press, 151–192.
Aristotle: 1978 trans.,On Sophistical Refutations: On Coming-to-Be and Passing Away, E. S. Forster (trans.), Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press.
Aristotle: 1976 trans.,Topica, E. S. Forster (trans.), Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press.
Bitzer, Lloyd: 1968, “The Rhetorical Situation”,Philosophy and Rhetoric 1, 1–14.
Cooper, Lane: 1932,The Rhetoric of Aristotle: An Expanded Translation with Supplementary Examples for Students of Composition and Public Speaking, New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc.
Cope, Edward Meredith: 1877,The Rhetoric of Aristotle with a Commentary, John Edwin Sandys (ed.), Dubuque, Iowa: Reprint Library.
Doxtader, Eric: 1991, “The Entwinement of Argument and Rhetoric: A Dialectical Reading of Habermas' Theory of Communicative Action”,Argumentation and Advocacy 28, 51–63.
Farrell, Thomas B.: 1976, “Knowledge, Consensus, and Rhetorical Theory”,Quarterly Journal of Speech 62, 1–17.
Farrell, Thomas B.: 1993,Norms of Rhetorical Culture: Recovering a Praxis for Civic Life, New Haven, Yale University Press.
Goodnight, G. Thomas: 1992, “Habermas, The Public Sphere, And Controversy”,International Journal of Public Opinion Research 4, 243–255.
Goodnight, G. Thomas: 1993, “Legitimation Inferences: An Additional Component for the Toulmin Model”,Journal of Informal Logic, in press.
Habermas, Jurgen: 1974, “The Public Sphere. An Encyclopedia Article - 1964”,New German Critique 1, 49–55.
Habermas, Jurgen: 1984,The Theory of Communicative Action: Reason and the Rationalization of Society, Vol. I, Thomas McCarthy (trans.), Boston, Beacon Press.
Hegel, G.W.F.: 1975 trans., “Fragments”, in:Early Theological Writings. T. M. Knox (trans.), Philadelphia, Philadelphia Press.
Grimaldi, William M. A.: 1980,Aristotle, Rhetoric I: A Commentary, New York, Fordham University Press.
McKeon, Richard: 1987a, “The Uses of Rhetoric in a Technological Age”, in:Rhetoric: Essays in Invention and Discovery. Mark Backman (ed.), Woodbridge, CT, Ox Bow Press, 1–24.
McKeon, Richard: 1987b, “The Methods of Rhetoric and Philosophy: Invention and Judgment”, in:Rhetoric: Essays in Invention and Discovery. Mark Backman (ed.), Woodbridge, CT, Ox Bow Press, 56–65.
Perelman, Chaim and L. Olbrechts-Tyteca: 1969,The New Rhetoric: A Treatise on Argumentation, John Wilkinson and Purcell Weaver (trans.), Notre Dame, University of Notre Dame Press.
Solmsen, Friedrich: 1954, “Introduction”, in:Aristotle Rhetoric and Poetics, Rhys Roberts, (trans.), New York, Modern Library.
Van Eemeren, Frans H. and Rob Grootendorst: 1984,Speech Acts in Argumentative Discussions: A Theoretical Model for the Analysis of Discussions Directed towards Solving Conflicts of Opinions, Dordrecht-Holland, Foris Publications.
Van Eemeren, Frans H., Rob Grootendorst, and Tjark Kruiger: 1987,Handbook of Argumentation Theory: A Critical Survey of Classical Backgrounds and Modern Studies, Dordrecht-Holland, Foris Publications.
Van Eemeren, Frans H. and Rob Grootendorst: 1992,Argumentation, Communication, and Fallacies: a Pragma-Dialectical Perspective, Hillsdale, New Jersey, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
Wenzel, Joseph W.: 1990, “Three Perspectives on Argument: Rhetoric, Dialectic, Logic”, in:Perspectives on Argumentation: Essays in Honor of Wayne Brockriede, Robert Trapp and Janice Schuetz (eds.), Prospect Heights, Illinois, Waveland.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
Thomas Goodnight is a Professor of Communication Studies at Northwestern University. This manuscript was revised from a lecture delivered at the University of Amsterdam, November 1991.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Goodnight, G.T. A “new rhetoric” for a “new dialectic”: Prolegomena to a responsible public argument. Argumentation 7, 329–342 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00710816
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00710816