Internet Political Discussion Forums As an Argumentative Activity Type: a Pragma- Dialectical Analysis of Online Forms of Strategic Manoeuvring in Reacting Critically
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
UvA-DARE (Digital Academic Repository) Internet political discussion forums as an argumentative activity type: A pragma- dialectical analysis of online forms of strategic manoeuvring in reacting critically Lewiński, M. Publication date 2010 Document Version Final published version Link to publication Citation for published version (APA): Lewiński, M. (2010). Internet political discussion forums as an argumentative activity type: A pragma-dialectical analysis of online forms of strategic manoeuvring in reacting critically. Rozenberg Publishers. General rights It is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), other than for strictly personal, individual use, unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons). Disclaimer/Complaints regulations If you believe that digital publication of certain material infringes any of your rights or (privacy) interests, please let the Library know, stating your reasons. In case of a legitimate complaint, the Library will make the material inaccessible and/or remove it from the website. Please Ask the Library: https://uba.uva.nl/en/contact, or a letter to: Library of the University of Amsterdam, Secretariat, Singel 425, 1012 WP Amsterdam, The Netherlands. You will be contacted as soon as possible. UvA-DARE is a service provided by the library of the University of Amsterdam (https://dare.uva.nl) Download date:25 Sep 2021 Internet politi cal discussion forums have been seen as either a great opportunity for or a great threat to argumentati on in the public sphere. What is missing in much debate about merits and demerits of online discourse is an account of how the characteristi cs of online politi cal discussion forums aff ect the shape and quality of parti cular argumentati ve moves. The goal of this study is to provide such an account by examining Internet forums as a specifi c context for argumentati on, that is, as one of the argumentati ve acti vity types. In parti cular, the conditi ons for reacti ng criti cally to argumentati on are analysed. It is argued that the minimally designed, informal, pseudonymous and highly contenti ous public discussions in online forums give ample opportunity for reacti ng criti cally. Some characteristi c patt erns of reacti ng criti cally in online discussions are recognised and analysed as strategic manoeuvres meant to give rhetorical advantage in online politi cal disputes. This study contributes to improving our appreciati on of argumentati on in the context of online politi cal discussions and to enhancing a contextual approach to studying ordinary discourse from the perspecti ve of argumentati on theory. Sic Sat / Amsterdam INTERNET POLITICAL DISCUSSION FORUMS AS AN ARGUMENTATIVE ACTIVITY TYPE A PRAGMA-DIALECTICAL ANALYSIS OF ONLINE FORMS OF STRATEGIC MANOEUVRING IN REACTING CRITICALLY © Marcin Lewiński, 2010 All rights reserved. Save exceptions stated by the law, no part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system of any nature, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, included a complete or partial transcription, without the prior written permission of the author, application for which should be addressed to author. Cover illustration: Paul Klee, Drei junge Exoten, 1938, 19, Kleisterfarbe auf Papier auf Karton, 46,6 x 39,8cm © Zentrum Paul Klee, Bern, c/o Pictoright Amsterdam 2010 Cover design: Dima + Marcin, Lugano-Amsterdam 2010 SicSat International Centre for the Study of Argumentation Postbus 3267 1001 AB Amsterdam The Netherlands (+) 31 (0) 20 525 47 12 [email protected] www.sicsat.nl In cooperation with: Rozenberg Publishers Lindengracht 302 d+e 1015 KN Amsterdam The Netherlands (+) 31 (0) 20 625 54 29 [email protected] www.rozenbergps.com ISBN 978 90 3610 189 9 NUR 616 INTERNET POLITICAL DISCUSSION FORUMS AS AN ARGUMENTATIVE ACTIVITY TYPE A pragma-dialectical analysis of online forms of strategic manoeuvring in reacting critically ACADEMISCH PROEFSCHRIFT ter verkrijging van de graad van doctor aan de Universiteit van Amsterdam op gezag van de Rector Magnificus prof. dr. D.C. van den Boom ten overstaan van een door het college voor promoties ingestelde commissie, in het openbaar te verdedigen in de Agnietenkapel op vrijdag 11 juni 2010, te 16:00 uur door Marcin Lewiński geboren te Kępno, Polen Promotiecommissie Promotor: Prof. dr. F.H. van Eemeren Co-promotor: Dr. B.J. Garssen Overige Leden: Prof. dr. T. van Haaften Prof. dr. J.A.L. Hoeken Prof. dr. mr. P.J. van den Hoven Dr. A.R. Edwards Dr. A.F. Snoeck Henkemans Faculteit der Geesteswetenschappen Table of Contents Chapter 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Online discussion forums as object of research 1 1.2 Research problem and research questions 2 1.3 Method and organisation of the study 6 Chapter 2 Walton and Krabbe’s dialogue types as conversational contexts of argument 11 2.1 The study of context in contemporary theories of argumentation 11 2.2 General types of dialogue, mixed dialogues and dialectical shifts 15 2.3 Theoretical complications 19 2.4 Practical problems in analysing Internet discussions 22 Chapter 3 Argumentation designs in the account of Jackson, Jacobs and Aakhus 33 3.1 Design enterprise in the study of argumentation 33 3.2 Argumentation designs in computer-mediated argumentation 37 3.3 Informal Internet discussions as argumentation designs 40 Chapter 4 Argumentative activity types in the pragma-dialectical theory of argumentation 47 4.1 Deepening the analysis of contextualised argumentation 47 4.2 Using the ideal model of a critical discussion 48 4.3 Strategic manoeuvring in various argumentative activity types 51 4.4 Conclusion concerning the required analytic approach 59 Chapter 5 Internet discussion forums as a technology for informal political deliberation 63 5.1 Characterising Internet political discussion forums 63 5.2 The design of Internet discussion forums in Google Groups 64 5.3 Internet political discussions as deliberative activities aimed at opinion-formation 70 Chapter 6 Internet discussion forums as an argumentative activity type 81 6.1 The role of argumentation in online political forum discussions 81 6.2 The initial situation 83 6.2.1 Disagreement as a necessary condition for an argumentative discussion 83 6.2.2 Conditions for expressing disagreements in Internet discussions 87 6.2.3 Ways of expressing disagreements in Internet discussions 90 6.3 Starting points 93 6.3.1 Procedural starting points 93 6.3.2 Material starting points 96 6.4 Means of argumentation and criticism 99 6.5 Possible outcome 107 Chapter 7 Constraints on critical reactions in Internet political discussion forums 115 7.1 Describing critical reactions in an ideal procedure and in actual discussions 115 7.2 Critical reactions in the pragma-dialectical theory of argumentation 116 7.3 Three aspects of reacting critically in Internet discussion forums 128 7.3.1 Adaptation to audience demand 129 7.3.2 Selection from the topical potential 134 7.3.3 Choice of presentational devices 136 Chapter 8 Analysis of critical reactions in Internet political discussions 139 8.1 Patterns of strategic manoeuvring in reacting critically 139 8.2 Analysis of critical reactions concerning the acceptability of premises 140 8.2.1 First pattern: ‘provide quote or link’ 140 8.2.2 Second pattern: the collective antagonist 148 8.3 Analysis of critical reactions concerning the justificatory potential of argumentation 157 8.3.1 Third pattern: criticise as much as possible 157 8.3.2 Fourth pattern: topical irrelevance as weak justification 161 8.4 The management of the burden of proof in critical reactions on the Internet 166 Chapter 9 The straw man fallacy in reacting critically in Internet forums 169 9.1 Characterising straw man as a case of fallacious strategic manoeuvring 169 9.2 Two examples of alleged straw man attacks in online discussions 172 9.3 The straw man within the pragma-dialectical treatment of fallacies 179 9.4 Constraints on reformulating standpoints and arguments in discussion forums 186 9.5 Interpretation and reconstruction of alleged straw man attempts 189 9.5.1 Pragmatic plausibility as a basic criterion for the interpretation of critical reactions 189 9.5.2 The principle of charity in reconstructing argumentative discourse 192 9.5.3 Conventions of discourse reconstruction in various argumentative activity types 201 9.6 Soundness criteria for identifying straw men in Internet discussion forums 204 Chapter 10 Conclusion 207 10.1 The main results 207 10.2 Implications of the results and directions for future research 214 References 219 Samenvatting 231 Index of names 235 Index of subjects 239 Preface My first thanks go to my supervisors. Frans van Eemeren, apart from his great insight in the problems of argumentation theory, never ceased to amaze me with a rare skill of providing feedback to my ideas that was sometimes justifiably critical but, by some miracle, always remained encouraging. Bart Garssen, thanks to his precise knowledge of pragma-dialectics and familiarity with online discussions, helped me in refining many points of the developing dissertation. Besides, I cannot but appreciate the amount of hard work they both put in meticulous reading of successive drafts of all the chapters of the manuscript (some of them were not entirely of great quality, mind you). It is largely thanks to their detailed comments, criticisms and encouragements that the dissertation could be finished in the present form (and in the present time, so to speak). Three other members of the Department of Speech Communication, Argumentation Theory and Rhetoric at the University of Amsterdam belong to the context of discovery of the ideas discussed in this book. My interest into the problem of contextual embeddedness of everyday argumentation was initiated in the excellent class on verbal communication taught by Agnès van Rees back in 2005.