CFP: "Strategies in Argumentation," Faculty of Philosophy, University of Groningen, February 14-15, 2008.

Arguers and critics characteristically aim to realize several goals at the same time. On the one hand, a discussant pretends to make contributions that are reasonable (for instance, by furthering the resolution of the underlying dispute). On the other hand, he also wants to be seen as trying to make effective contributions. Depending on the situation, the contribution is to be effective with respect to a favorable deal (in a negotiation), with respect to persuading the interlocutor of a certain conclusion or standpoint (in an argumentative discussion) or with respect to getting the adversary to acknowledge the superiority of his reasoning (in polemic contexts). Strategic considerations can pertain to the purpose of reasonableness, to the purpose of effectiveness, or to the aim of finding a balance between them (‘strategic manoeuvring’). We invite proposals for paper presentations that deal with any of these three kinds of argumentative strategies. We hope for submissions from scholars and PhD students working within pragma-dialectics, computational dialectic, dialogue logic, game theory, formal dialectic, rhetoric, and the like. Further details available here: http://www.rug.nl/filosofie/sia/index.