Posted in Argumentation, CFP, Communication, Connections, tagged evidence based medicine, expertise, medical argumentation, Topoi special issues on June 18, 2018| Leave a Comment »
Guest Editors: Fabrizio Macagno and Carlo Martini
This special issue will focus on the relationship between argumentation and the critical use of evidence in medical decision-making. In particular, the research question is whether the current concepts and accounts of evidence and expertise are adequate for capturing the subjective, reason-based and argumentative component of evidence-based medical science, as well as the role of experts as mediators and communicators.
Posted in Argumentation, CFP, Communication, Connections, tagged interpersonal reasoning, normativity in argumentation, strategic maneuvering, Topoi special issues on November 30, 2014| 1 Comment »
DEADLINE EXTENDED TO 11 JANUARY 2015
Guest Edited by Chris Campolo and David Godden
The re-discovery, in the late 1970’s, of the perspectives on argument as process and practice (added to that of product) occasioned a dramatic re-visioning of the object of study in argumentation. Viewed as a practice of transacting reasons, argumentation became a situated activity, or doing, requiring know-how, rather than a collection of reasons – a thing containing a collection of knowledge-that.
This volume focuses on the normative and epistemic dimensions and consequences of viewing argumentation as the practice/s of transacting (giving and asking for) reasons. We mean to create momentum behind the perspectives focused primarily on the actions and doings which, alongside many related human practices, constitute argumentation. Here we open a space to explore and interrogate the idea that neither argumentation as a whole, nor the many elements into which it may be analyzed, can be adequately understood apart from an account of what it is to give reasons, with all the complexity and fluidity that attends our engagement in any kind of know-how. Rather, the practice/s of transacting reasons is central to the projects of explaining what a reason is, how reasons work, the normativity of reasons, as well as their prescriptivity (or our accountability to them).
Posted in Argumentation, CFP, Communication, tagged Andrew Aberdein, argument and cognitive science, biases and heuristics, Dan Cohen, Topoi special issues, virtues and arguments on October 18, 2013| 1 Comment »
CALL FOR PAPERS
Topoi: An International Review of Philosophy
VIRTUES AND ARGUMENTS
Deadline for submission: September 1, 2014
GUEST EDITORS
Andrew Aberdein (Florida Institute of Technology)
Daniel Cohen (Colby College)
OVERVIEW
Virtue-based approaches have made substantial contributions to ethics and epistemology. They have also found application in more unexpected fields, including the study of argument. Virtue Argumentation Theory mandates a shift in focus from acts and objects, or processes and products, to agents. Thus, Virtue Argumentation Theory brings a set of difficult but important new questions into focus, particularly about arguers’ conduct in inter-agent transactions. At the same time, Virtue Argumentation Theory also provides new signposts leading to their resolution. Several authors have recently begun to suggest answers to these questions. This special issue will consolidate and extend their work.
POSSIBLE TOPICS (more…)
RAIL 