標(biāo)題: Titlebook: Dialectic and Rhetoric; The Warp and Woof of Frans H. Eemeren,Peter Houtlosser Book 2002 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2002 Arg [打印本頁(yè)] 作者: 法官所用 時(shí)間: 2025-3-21 18:03
書(shū)目名稱(chēng)Dialectic and Rhetoric影響因子(影響力)
書(shū)目名稱(chēng)Dialectic and Rhetoric影響因子(影響力)學(xué)科排名
書(shū)目名稱(chēng)Dialectic and Rhetoric網(wǎng)絡(luò)公開(kāi)度
書(shū)目名稱(chēng)Dialectic and Rhetoric網(wǎng)絡(luò)公開(kāi)度學(xué)科排名
書(shū)目名稱(chēng)Dialectic and Rhetoric被引頻次
書(shū)目名稱(chēng)Dialectic and Rhetoric被引頻次學(xué)科排名
書(shū)目名稱(chēng)Dialectic and Rhetoric年度引用
書(shū)目名稱(chēng)Dialectic and Rhetoric年度引用學(xué)科排名
書(shū)目名稱(chēng)Dialectic and Rhetoric讀者反饋
書(shū)目名稱(chēng)Dialectic and Rhetoric讀者反饋學(xué)科排名
作者: WATER 時(shí)間: 2025-3-21 22:33
Pivotal Issues and Norms in Rhetorical Theories of Argumentation,hich bridge their ancient domains, contemporary rhetoricians and dialecticians converse with a renewed understanding that major concerns of each cannot be resolved independent of matters traditionally treated by its counterpart.作者: DEVIL 時(shí)間: 2025-3-22 01:57 作者: chiropractor 時(shí)間: 2025-3-22 08:03 作者: 文字 時(shí)間: 2025-3-22 11:41
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-11312-4ing definitions of rhetoric and of dialectic that will conveniently limit the subject. Hopefully, these limitations will not impair the paper’s further goal of contributing to a better appreciation of contemporary attempts to integrate rhetoric with dialectic..作者: 自愛(ài) 時(shí)間: 2025-3-22 15:59 作者: 自愛(ài) 時(shí)間: 2025-3-22 17:54 作者: OPINE 時(shí)間: 2025-3-22 22:36 作者: BUMP 時(shí)間: 2025-3-23 02:21 作者: enterprise 時(shí)間: 2025-3-23 05:50 作者: 沒(méi)血色 時(shí)間: 2025-3-23 11:25 作者: Decimate 時(shí)間: 2025-3-23 15:02 作者: AMPLE 時(shí)間: 2025-3-23 20:46 作者: 拒絕 時(shí)間: 2025-3-24 01:45
Book 2002pective: a dialectical and a rhetorical perspective. Our intention was to start a thorough disc- sion on the commonalities and differences between the two approaches. In this way we hoped to promote the development of analytic tools for dealing with argum- tation in which, in some way or other, the 作者: sleep-spindles 時(shí)間: 2025-3-24 03:11 作者: BOOST 時(shí)間: 2025-3-24 08:41 作者: alliance 時(shí)間: 2025-3-24 12:29 作者: gorgeous 時(shí)間: 2025-3-24 16:41 作者: instulate 時(shí)間: 2025-3-24 21:00
Dialectic and Rhetoric978-94-015-9948-1Series ISSN 1566-7650 Series E-ISSN 2215-1907 作者: Functional 時(shí)間: 2025-3-25 02:04 作者: uveitis 時(shí)間: 2025-3-25 05:24
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-8350-9148-1o need for debate on the basis of reasonableness, and therefore, also from an Aristotelian point of view, no need for rhetoric. This is the — intended — bewildering conclusion of the following paradoxical argument by the Stoic philosopher Zeno, directed against the age-old rule that the two sides in作者: dyspareunia 時(shí)間: 2025-3-25 09:08 作者: 死亡 時(shí)間: 2025-3-25 14:28
Tobias Jenert,Gabi Reinmann,Tobias Schmohlfers generally to a person possessing argumentative capabilities, there is a special term “sophist” for someone who uses theses capabilities to mislead by means of specious arguments; by contrast, the term “rhetor” marks both the general category of people with an aptitude for persuasive speaking as作者: Ejaculate 時(shí)間: 2025-3-25 18:28 作者: overwrought 時(shí)間: 2025-3-25 23:48
Begleitforschung in der Hochschuldidaktiktative discourse. I call these claims “ethnocentric” in Richard Rorty’s sense, meaning that I currently have no other perspective about the topic than what I grew up with — a purely American perspective — though I hope the project of which this paper is a part will help correct that matter. The thre作者: 退出可食用 時(shí)間: 2025-3-26 01:51 作者: LAST 時(shí)間: 2025-3-26 06:16
Christa Them,Jutta Wetzlmair,Eva Schulc counterpart among the arts of discourse. Today, students of argumentation, contemporary heirs of these venerable traditions, have undertaken a congenial reconsideration of the relationships between their respective arts. Prompted in part by Twentieth Century advances in the philosophy of language w作者: Optimum 時(shí)間: 2025-3-26 12:31
Szenisches Lernen an der Hochschuleinformed traditions of informal logic and pragma-dialectics. Central to this revival (initiated by Hamblin, 1970) has been a broadened understanding of what makes various argumentative tactics fallacious in the first place. Two general and not altogether exclusive lines of re-analysis have been offe作者: THROB 時(shí)間: 2025-3-26 16:12 作者: 率直 時(shí)間: 2025-3-26 18:18 作者: DRAFT 時(shí)間: 2025-3-26 21:20
Argumentation Libraryhttp://image.papertrans.cn/d/image/270838.jpg作者: Cumbersome 時(shí)間: 2025-3-27 04:30 作者: overweight 時(shí)間: 2025-3-27 07:53
978-90-481-6057-0Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2002作者: 命令變成大炮 時(shí)間: 2025-3-27 09:59
And Always the Twain Shall Meet,f . (2001, p. 2). We are charmed by the fact that in his endeavor to reconcile the ‘rational’ and the ‘reasonable’ Toulmin (2001, p. 24) refers to the Dutch, who “use the word . to mark the ‘reasonable’ off from the ‘rational’ clearly” (unlike the Germans who seem to use . and . “almost interchangea作者: Coordinate 時(shí)間: 2025-3-27 16:39
Reasonable Argument before Aristotle,o need for debate on the basis of reasonableness, and therefore, also from an Aristotelian point of view, no need for rhetoric. This is the — intended — bewildering conclusion of the following paradoxical argument by the Stoic philosopher Zeno, directed against the age-old rule that the two sides in作者: labile 時(shí)間: 2025-3-27 19:30
Meeting in the House of Callias,ice. But, since this is an undertaking that would surely exceed the boundaries of any single paper, the best thing to do is to start at once with working definitions of rhetoric and of dialectic that will conveniently limit the subject. Hopefully, these limitations will not impair the paper’s furthe作者: geriatrician 時(shí)間: 2025-3-27 22:13
Rhetoric and Dialectic,fers generally to a person possessing argumentative capabilities, there is a special term “sophist” for someone who uses theses capabilities to mislead by means of specious arguments; by contrast, the term “rhetor” marks both the general category of people with an aptitude for persuasive speaking as作者: 分散 時(shí)間: 2025-3-28 03:29
The Relation between Dialectic and Rhetoric in a Classical and a Modern Perspective,fer a basis for understanding more recent developments.. Then, in light of this historical analysis, I want to characterize some current approaches to dialectic. Finally, I want to maintain that a hybrid conception of dialectic has the virtue of negotiating between logic and rhetoric, or more proper作者: 土坯 時(shí)間: 2025-3-28 08:55 作者: Accrue 時(shí)間: 2025-3-28 10:48 作者: bioavailability 時(shí)間: 2025-3-28 18:07 作者: 憲法沒(méi)有 時(shí)間: 2025-3-28 21:23
Messages, Functional Contexts, and Categories of Fallacy,informed traditions of informal logic and pragma-dialectics. Central to this revival (initiated by Hamblin, 1970) has been a broadened understanding of what makes various argumentative tactics fallacious in the first place. Two general and not altogether exclusive lines of re-analysis have been offe作者: 生存環(huán)境 時(shí)間: 2025-3-29 02:13
Strategic Maneuvering,in 46 BC. After having fought a great number of battles under Caesar’s command, the soldiers had refused to follow him again. Caesar’s use of the word . as form of address had a devastating effect. According to the classical scholar Anton Leeman (1992), ‘quirites’ was the dignified word a Roman magi作者: blackout 時(shí)間: 2025-3-29 04:19 作者: orthopedist 時(shí)間: 2025-3-29 07:59 作者: 表狀態(tài) 時(shí)間: 2025-3-29 14:47 作者: 吞下 時(shí)間: 2025-3-29 17:04 作者: insomnia 時(shí)間: 2025-3-29 20:34
Szenisches Lernen an der Hochschuleable moves. Other types of supposedly fallacious moves such as argument ad ignorantiam and the various sorts of hasty conclusions associated with reasoning by sign, example, analogy and the like have been argued to be weak but only fallacious when taken to prove more than they can support. While inf作者: 休閑 時(shí)間: 2025-3-30 03:09
Zukunftsforschung in der Lehrpraxisllustration of how the communicative and interactional meaning of argumentative language use can only be grasped if the discourse is first put in a functional perspective in which its social context and the commitments assumed by the participants are duly taken into account..
