1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Journal of Argumentation in Context
  4. Online First Articles
  5. Online First Article
image of For your own good
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

In pragma-dialectics fallacies are viewed as violations of rules for critical discussion. The results of the ‘Conceptions of reasonableness’ project indicate that people confronted with clear cases of violations of these rules in experimental research consistently judge them as unreasonable. How can it then be explained that fallacies remain so often unrecognized in actual argumentative practices? In tackling this question, this article focuses on the fallacy, which involves a violation of the pragma-dialectical Freedom Rule by preventing others from advancing a standpoint or doubt through making a threat. Earlier experimental testing in the Netherlands confirmed the hypothesis that arguers will be more inclined to consider an as reasonable that can also be seen as a piece of advice than an “undisguised” . The results of the replication in China reported in the current article confirm the results of the original study.

© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/jaic.25038.van
2026-02-26
2026-03-06

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/jaic.25038.van
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Clark, H. H.
    (1973) The language-as-fixed-effect fallacy: A critique of language statistics in psycholinguistics. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, , –. 10.1016/S0022‑5371(73)80014‑3
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(73)80014-3 [Google Scholar]
  2. van Eemeren, F. H.
    (2010) Strategic Maneuvering in Argumentative Discourse. Extending the Pragma-Dialectical Theory of Argumentation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/aic.2
     https://doi.org/10.1075/aic.2
  3. van Eemeren, F. H., & Garssen, B.
    (2023) The Pragma-Dialectical Approach to the Fallacies Revisited. Argumentation, (), –.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. van Eemeren, F. H., Garssen, B., & Meuffels, B.
    (2009) Fallacies and Judgments of Reasonableness: Empirical Research concerning the Pragma-Dialectical Discussion Rules. Dordrecht: Springer. 10.1007/978‑90‑481‑2614‑9
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-2614-9
  5. (2012a) The disguised abusive ad hominem empirically investigated: Strategic manoeuvering with direct personal attacks. Thinking & Reasoning, (), –. 10.1080/13546783.2012.678666
     https://doi.org/10.1080/13546783.2012.678666 [Google Scholar]
  6. (2012b) The extended pragma-dialectical argumentation theory empirically interpreted. InF. H. van Eemeren & B. Garssen (Eds.), Topical Themes in Argumentation Theory: Twenty Exploratory Studies (pp.–). Dordrecht: Springer. 10.1007/978‑94‑007‑4041‑9_21
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4041-9_21 [Google Scholar]
  7. (2015) The disguised ad baculum fallacy empirically investigated: Strategic maneuvering with threats. InF. H. van Eemeren (Ed.), Reasonableness and Effectiveness in Argumentative Discourse: Fifty Contributions to the Development of Pragma-Dialectics (pp.–). Springer.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. van Eemeren, F. H., & Grootendorst, R.
    (1992) Argumentation, Communication, and Fallacies: A Pragma-Dialectical Perspective. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
  9. (1984) Speech Acts in Argumentative Discussions: A Theoretical Model for the Analysis of Discussions Directed towards Solving Conflicts of Opinion. Berlin: De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110846089
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110846089
  10. (2004) A Systematic Theory of Argumentation: The Pragma-Dialectical Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  11. Garssen, B.
    (2009) Ad hominem in disguise: Strategic manoeuvring with direct personal attacks. Argumentation and Advocacy, (), –. 10.1080/00028533.2009.11821709
     https://doi.org/10.1080/00028533.2009.11821709 [Google Scholar]
  12. van Poppel, L.
    (2013) Getting the vaccine now will protect you in the future! A pragma-dialectical analysis of strategic maneuvering with pragmatic argumentation in health brochures. Doctoral dissertation, University of Amsterdam.
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/jaic.25038.van
Loading
For your own good
John Benjamins ; https://doi.org/10.1075/jaic.25038.van
/content/journals/10.1075/jaic.25038.van
/content/journals/10.1075/jaic.25038.van
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keywords: argumentum ad baculum ; Pragma-Dialectics ; experimental research ; fallacy ; hidden fallaciousness ; Freedom Rule

Most Cited

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error