ARGUMENTATION, R. PAVILIONIS’S MEANING CONTINUUM AND THE KITCHEN DEBATE Cover Image

ARGUMENTATION, R. PAVILIONIS’S MEANING CONTINUUM AND THE KITCHEN DEBATE
ARGUMENTATION, R. PAVILIONIS’S MEANING CONTINUUM AND THE KITCHEN DEBATE

Author(s): Elena Lisanyuk
Subject(s): Philosophy, Philosophy of Language
Published by: Vilniaus Universiteto Leidykla
Keywords: abstract argumentation frameworks;cognitive diversity; Pavilionis’s meaning continuum;the Kitchen Debate;

Summary/Abstract: In this paper, I propose a logical-cognitive approach to argumentation and advocate an idea that argumentation presupposes that intelligent agents engaged in it are cognitively diverse. My approach to argumentation allows drawing distinctions between justification, conviction and persuasion as its different kinds. In justification agents seek to verify weak or strong coherency of an agent’s position in a dialogue. In conviction they argue to modify their partner’s position by means of demonstrating weak or strong cogency of their positions before a ‘rational judge’. My approach to argumentation employs a ‘light’ version of Dung’s abstract argumentative frameworks. It is based on Stich’s idea of agents’ cognitive diversity the epistemic aspect of which is argued to be close to Pavilionis’s conception of meaning continuum. To illustrate my contributions I use an example based on the Kitchen Debate (1959) between Khrushchev and Nixon.

  • Issue Year: 2015
  • Issue No: 88
  • Page Range: 95-113
  • Page Count: 19
  • Language: English
Toggle Accessibility Mode