In Giving Reasons, I developed a linguistic-pragmatic model for argumentation based on a characterization of acts of arguing as second order speech-act complexes. Such linguistic approach aimed to integrate argumentation’s logical, dialectical and rhetorical features and normative constraints and to give a unitary account of its justificatory and persuasive powers. Taking as a basis Bach and Harnish’s Speech Act Schema (SAS), my contention was that this model was able to deal with non-literal and indirect argumentation. I am going to explain the rationale for such an approach. In addition, as a case study, I will analyze analogical argumentation and show that the model is able to explain why certain types of analogical arguments can be said to be deductive and yet defeasible.
Dr. Lilian Bermejo-Luque, University of Granada