Explores how we justify our beliefs - and try to influence those of others - both soundly and effectively.

Since the late 1950s the study of argumentation has developed from a marginal part of logic and rhetoric into a genuine interdisciplinary academic discipline. After having first been primarily concerned with creating an adequate philosophical perspective on argumentation, argumentation theorists have gradually shifted their focus of attention to a more immediate concern with the ins and outs of argumentative praxis. What exactly are the characteristics of situated argumentative discourse in different argumentative 'action types'? How is the discourse influenced by institutional and contextual constraints? In what way can prominent cases of argumentative discourse be fruitfully analysed? Argumentation in Practice aims to provide insight into some important facets of argumentative praxis and the different ways in which it can be approached. The first part of this volume, 'Conceptions of problems in argumentative practice', introduces useful theoretical perspectives. The second part, 'Empirical studies of argumentative practice', contains both empirical studies of a general kind and several types of specific case studies.

Argumentation in Actual Practice contains a collection of topical studies about argumentative discourse in context written by argumentation scholars from a diversity of academic backgrounds. Some contributions provide general perspectives, other contributions deal with specific issues, particular types of argumentative discourse or individual argumentative speech events. The contexts in which argumentation is examined vary from politics and the media to medical, juridical, educational, commercial or military contexts, a specific academic discipline, a special issue or pertain to all kinds of contextualised argumentative discourse. The issues discussed include the interpretation and analysis of argumentation, strategic manoeuvring, argument schemes, the stock issues, the fallacies, the principle of charity and the persuasiveness of argumentative discourse. A common feature is that they are all empirically-oriented and that virtually all of them are strongly concerned with an adequate understanding of contextualised argumentative discourse and the factors that may increase or decrease its reasonableness and effectiveness.

Scientists use arguments to relate the evidence that they select from their investigations and to justify the claims that they make about their observations. This book brings together leading researchers to draw attention to research, policy and practice around the inclusion of argumentation in chemistry education.

The study of argumentation has primarily focused on logical and dialectical approaches, with minimal attention given to the rhetorical facets of argument. Rhetorical Argumentation: Principles of Theory and Practice approaches argumentation from a rhetorical point of view and demonstrates how logical and dialectical considerations depend on the rhetorical features of the argumentative situation. Throughout this text, author Christopher W. Tindale identifies how argumentation as a communicative practice can best be understood by its rhetorical features.