Pragma-dialectics

Pragma-dialectics (also known as the pragma-dialectical theory) is a program in argumentation theory developed since the late 1970s by Dutch scholars Frans H. van Eemeren and Rob Grootendorst at the University of Amsterdam. It conceives argumentation as a form of goal-directed communicative activity aimed at the reasonable resolution of differences of opinion by means of a critical discussion. Combining a pragmatic interest in how argumentative discourse is actually used with a dialectical interest in how it ought to proceed, pragma-dialectics studies argumentation as a complex speech act that occurs in natural language use and serves specific communicative purposes.

The theory is both descriptive and normative. It offers tools for reconstructing ordinary argumentative exchanges in terms of an ideal model of a critical discussion and uses that model to evaluate whether a discourse contributes to resolving a disagreement in a reasonable way. Central to pragma-dialectics is a four-stage model of critical discussion (confrontation, opening, argumentation and concluding) and a set of ten discussion rules that parties should observe; systematic violations of these rules are treated as fallacies. The approach integrates insights from critical rationalism, formal dialectics, speech act theory, Gricean language philosophy and discourse analysis, operationalized through meta-theoretical principles such as functionalization, socialization, externalization and dialectification.

Later developments of the pragma-dialectical framework incorporate rhetorical insights in the notion of strategic maneuvering, which analyzes how arguers try to be both reasonable and persuasive by choosing topical starting points, adapting to their audience and exploiting presentational devices within the constraints of a critical discussion. Because it combines detailed analytical instruments with clear evaluative standards, pragma-dialectics has been applied to a wide range of argumentative practices, including legal and political argumentation, mediation, negotiation, (parliamentary) debate, interpersonal and health communication, and the study of complex and visual argumentation.