Arguments from Fairness and Misplaced Priorities in Political Argumentation

Journal of Politics and Law, 6(3), 2013, 78-94

17 Pages Posted: 3 Oct 2013

See all articles by Douglas Walton

Douglas Walton

University of Windsor

Hans Hansen

University of Windsor - Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences

Date Written: May 13, 2013

Abstract

Argumentation schemes are formal structures that are used to represent types of arguments that are prominent in natural language discourse. Recent research in argumentation studies has identified and investigated many of these schemes. The two types of arguments studied in this paper, found to be used during a pilot study of kinds of arguments used by the candidates in a recent Ontario provincial election, have not so far been formalized as schemes. We call them argument from fairness and argument from misplaced priorities. We formulate schemes for them, and analyze several examples of them from our corpus by means of constructing argument diagrams that fit the argument into the scheme.

Keywords: argumentation schemes, political rhetoric, argument mining, argument mapping

Suggested Citation

Walton, Douglas and Hansen, Hans, Arguments from Fairness and Misplaced Priorities in Political Argumentation (May 13, 2013). Journal of Politics and Law, 6(3), 2013, 78-94, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2334559

Douglas Walton (Contact Author)

University of Windsor ( email )

401 Sunset Avenue
Windsor, Ontario N9B 3P4
Canada

Hans Hansen

University of Windsor - Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences ( email )

Canada

Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?

Paper statistics

Downloads
80
Abstract Views
360
Rank
551,205
PlumX Metrics