Understanding Argumentation: Concepts and Applications

Argumentation

Argumentation is a process by which we gather arguments and data converging to support a particular thesis. Arguing means, above all, providing reasons that support certain conclusions; it is basically an activity of justification. This ensures a certain quality to statements, intending to enjoy rational acceptability on the part of the audiences to whom they are addressed.

To argue is an operation in which we provide a foundation that can support a thesis in the face of an interlocutor or audience. Arguing involves offering a range of factors in favor of a conclusion. Arguments are attempts to hold certain views with reasons. The basic elements of this activity include: a language, one or several working assumptions as a starting point, and rules guiding the steps acceptable for the passage from premises to conclusions.

The argument is expressed by means of a network, a web of argument, which guarantees the reliability of conclusions. It consists of a sequence of propositions aimed at producing or enhancing the consent and agreement of a listener. The listener is free to accept or reject it. Since we start with propositions or theses that are assumed or generally accepted by the audience, the argument is always relative to an auditorium. The conclusion of an argument is not true or false, but generates more or less support depending on whether the arguments are more or less convincing.

The question of what makes a solid argument does not have a simple answer. Certainly, the ability to sustain, to ward off possible objections, counter-arguments, and attempts at refutation, as well as their relevance and sufficiency in a given context, ensures the robustness of an argument.

Argument and its Contemporary Developments

The big news of Perelman’s new rhetoric is the controversial concept of the universal audience. A key element, the notion of audience is linked to the controversial problem of the difference between persuasion and conviction. Conviction is the argumentative discourse addressed to the idea of a universal audience limit. Persuasion is referenced to a specific audience, considering necessarily the characteristics of that audience and drawing, therefore, on elements of a psychological nature. Conviction entails the use of theses considered true by those who claim them. Persuasion carries within itself the presence of interests, not always justified. Thus, persuasive speech is an ad hominem discourse, while compelling speech is ad humanitatis.

Another crucial element of Perelman’s project is the difference between argumentation and demonstration. Argumentation differs from demonstration. While demonstration makes use of an artificial language—a system of signs, axioms, and transformation rules—argumentation employs natural language. Demonstration follows logical-formal reasoning, reaching necessary and universal conclusions. Argumentation uses techniques to arouse or increase the adherence of the spirits to the arguments that are presented and to get results that are more or less strong. Demonstration rests on the idea of evidence, before which every rational person is forced to yield; arguments do not accept the idea that all evidence proves serious decline.

Theory of Legal Argument

The theory of legal reasoning must be understood as a method of rational analysis of legal rules (and interpretation of legislative texts in general), the statements of dogmatic, the empirical premises used by lawyers, the logical structure of normative propositions, in short: all relevant aspects of the arguments for the justification of judicial decisions.

For theorists of legal arguments, arguing is “giving reasons for or against a particular thesis which is to support or refute.” This is an activity that takes place through language, assuming a renunciation of the use of force or psychological coercion as a means of resolving disputes.

Theories of legal argument focus on the use of arguments and the value of each of the speeches justifying a legal decision, seeking an increase of rationality in reasoning and practical application of law to the maximum extent possible.