Engineering argumentation in marriage: Pragma-dialectics, strategic maneuvering, and the “fair fight for change” in marriage education

Understanding argumentation in marriage as a design enterprise focuses researchers’ efforts in understanding how such arguments can go wrong and helps to identify designs that might help reduce unproductive conflict. Given the importance many marriage experts place on successful conflict management, designing procedures that help couples resolve their differences can potentially reduce the negative personal and societal results of failed marriages. In this paper I analyze the Fair Fight for Change (FFFC) conflict management procedure as a strategic maneuvering activity type. The purpose of this analysis is to examine the adequacy of the procedure itself in helping couples produce rational decisions about marital disagreements balanced by strategic maneuvers aimed to maintain the identity and relationship needs of the participants. Specifically, I recommend a redesign of the FFFC that incorporates a simplified version of the critical discussion rules to help guide couples as they attempt to resolve their differences.