Search results

  • Full text

  • Document type

    • Publication year

  • Organisation

Results: 142
Number of items: 142
  • van Eemeren, F. H., Garssen, B., & labrie, N. (2021). Argumentation between Doctors and Patients: Understanding clinical argumentative discourse. John Benjamins Publishing Company. https://doi.org/10.1075/z.235
  • Garssen, B. (2021). The Maxims of Common Sense: Strategic Manoeuvring with Figurative Analogies. In R. Boogaart, H. Jansen, & M. van Leeuwen (Eds.), The Language of Argumentation (pp. 213-227). (Argumentation Library; Vol. 36). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-52907-9_11
  • van Eemeren, F. H., & Garssen, B. (2020). Argument schemes: Extending the pragma-dialectical approach. In F. H. van Eemeren, & B. Garssen (Eds.), From Argument Schemes to Argumentative Relations in the Wild: A Variety of Contributions to Argumentation Theory (pp. 11-23). (Argumentation Library; Vol. 35). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-28367-4_2
  • van Eemeren, F. H., & Garssen, B. (Eds.) (2020). From Argument Schemes to Argumentative Relations in the Wild: A Variety of Contributions to Argumentation Theory. (Argumentation Library; Vol. 35). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-28367-4
  • van Eemeren, F. H., & Garssen, B. (2020). A variety of contributions to argumentation theory. In F. H. van Eemeren, & B. Garssen (Eds.), From Argument Schemes to Argumentative Relations in the Wild: A Variety of Contributions to Argumentation Theory (pp. 1-10). (Argumentation Library; Vol. 35). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-28367-4_1
  • Open Access
    Clahsen, S. C. S., van Klaveren, H. S., Vermeire, T. G., van Kamp, I., Garssen, B., Piersma, A. H., & Lebret, E. (2020). Understanding conflicting views of endocrine disruptor experts: a pilot study using argumentation analysis. Journal of Risk Research, 23(1), 62-80. https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2018.1517378
  • Open Access
    Clahsen, S. C. S., Moss, L., van Kamp, I., Vermeire, T. G., Garssen, B. J., Piersma, A. H., & Lebret, E. (2020). Analysis of different preferences for the EU's regulatory options forendocrine disruptor identification criteria using argumentation theory. Science of the Total Environment, 740, Article 140076. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.140076
  • Open Access
    van Eemeren, F. H., & Garssen, B. (2020). The pragma-dialectical view of comparison argumentation. In C. Dutilh Novaes, H. Jansen, J. A. van Laar , & B. Verheij (Eds.), Reason to Dissent: Proceedings of the 3rd European Conference on Argumentation (Vol. II, pp. 261-274). (Studies in Logic. Logic and Argumentation; Vol. 86). College Publications. https://www.collegepublications.co.uk/logic/sla/?00013
  • Garssen, B., Godden, D., Mitchell, G. R., & Wagemans, J. H. M. (Eds.) (2019). Proceedings of the Ninth Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation. Sic Sat. https://ilias-argumentation.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/ISSA_2018_Proceedings_of_the_Ninth_Confe-1.pdf
  • Garssen, B., & van Eemeren, F. H. (2019). And then you are left holding the baby! Strategic manoeuvring with the argumentum ad consequentiam. In B. Garssen, D. Godden, G. R. Mitchell, & J. H. M. Wagemans (Eds.), Proceedings of the Ninth Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation (pp. 398-407). Sic Sat. https://ilias-argumentation.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/ISSA_2018_Proceedings_of_the_Ninth_Confe-1.pdf
Page 2 of 15