F.H. van Eemeren – författare

In 1999 we invited a small number of colleagues to take part in a colloquium - voted to the analysis of argumentative discourse from two kinds of perspective: a dialectical and a rhetorical perspective. Our intention was to start a thorough disc- sion on the commonalities and differences between the two approaches. In this way we hoped to promote the development of analytic tools for dealing with argum- tation in which, in some way or other, the merits of both approaches are combined. The colloquium took place at the University of Amsterdam. In 2000 it was followed by a second colloquium at New York University, and in 2001 by a third one at Northwestern University. We are grateful to all three universities for giving us the chance to organize three exciting and fruitful meetings and we thank Eugene Garver, Eveline T. Feteris, M.A. van Rees, Ralph Johnson, A. Francisca Snoeck Hen- mans, Jose Plug, Bart Garssen, and Leah Polcar, who took part in the discussions but are not represented inthis volume, for their critical and useful contributions.

This volume of the Argumentation Library contains a collection of twenty-six theor­ etical contributions to the study of argumentation. Together they provide an over­ view of recent developments in the theory of argumentation which does justice to the theoretical variety in the field. InAnyone Who Has a View, the subject of argu­ mentation is approached from different angles. Both the formal and informal logical approaches and the rhetorical and communicative approaches arc represented in various ways. We arc convinced that the collection of essays as a whole will be of interest not only to those engaged directly in the study of argumentation, but also to scholars from a variety of disciplines who arc interested in the recent developments in this field. The book opens with an essay by the informal logician Robert C. Pinto. For all the differences between them, James B. Freeman, Harvey Siegel, Ralph H. Johnson, Hans V. Hansen, and J. Anthony Blair are also prominent members of that move­ ment. Some informal logicians either eschew or simply do not use formal methods in their approach to argumentation, while others, such as David Hitchcock, use both formal and informal methods. Erik C.W. Krabbe is a logician who proudly defends a formal dialectical approach to argumentation. Daniel H. Cohen, Frans H. van Eemeren, Peter Houtlosser, Fred J. Kauffeld, C. Scott Jacobs, Christian Kock, Christian Plantin, Sorin Stati, Chris Reed, Douglas N.

This volume of the Argumentation Library contains a collection of twenty-six theor­ etical contributions to the study of argumentation. Together they provide an over­ view of recent developments in the theory of argumentation which does justice to the theoretical variety in the field. InAnyone Who Has a View, the subject of argu­ mentation is approached from different angles. Both the formal and informal logical approaches and the rhetorical and communicative approaches arc represented in various ways. We arc convinced that the collection of essays as a whole will be of interest not only to those engaged directly in the study of argumentation, but also to scholars from a variety of disciplines who arc interested in the recent developments in this field. The book opens with an essay by the informal logician Robert C. Pinto. For all the differences between them, James B. Freeman, Harvey Siegel, Ralph H. Johnson, Hans V. Hansen, and J. Anthony Blair are also prominent members of that move­ ment. Some informal logicians either eschew or simply do not use formal methods in their approach to argumentation, while others, such as David Hitchcock, use both formal and informal methods. Erik C.W. Krabbe is a logician who proudly defends a formal dialectical approach to argumentation. Daniel H. Cohen, Frans H. van Eemeren, Peter Houtlosser, Fred J. Kauffeld, C. Scott Jacobs, Christian Kock, Christian Plantin, Sorin Stati, Chris Reed, Douglas N.

In 1999 we invited a small number of colleagues to take part in a colloquium - voted to the analysis of argumentative discourse from two kinds of perspective: a dialectical and a rhetorical perspective. Our intention was to start a thorough disc- sion on the commonalities and differences between the two approaches. In this way we hoped to promote the development of analytic tools for dealing with argum- tation in which, in some way or other, the merits of both approaches are combined. The colloquium took place at the University of Amsterdam. In 2000 it was followed by a second colloquium at New York University, and in 2001 by a third one at Northwestern University. We are grateful to all three universities for giving us the chance to organize three exciting and fruitful meetings and we thank Eugene Garver, Eveline T. Feteris, M.A. van Rees, Ralph Johnson, A. Francisca Snoeck Hen- mans, Jose Plug, Bart Garssen, and Leah Polcar, who took part in the discussions but are not represented inthis volume, for their critical and useful contributions.

This volume of the Argumentation Library contains a collection of twenty-six theor­ etical contributions to the study of argumentation. Together they provide an over­ view of recent developments in the theory of argumentation which does justice to the theoretical variety in the field. InAnyone Who Has a View, the subject of argu­ mentation is approached from different angles. Both the formal and informal logical approaches and the rhetorical and communicative approaches arc represented in various ways. We arc convinced that the collection of essays as a whole will be of interest not only to those engaged directly in the study of argumentation, but also to scholars from a variety of disciplines who arc interested in the recent developments in this field. The book opens with an essay by the informal logician Robert C. Pinto. For all the differences between them, James B. Freeman, Harvey Siegel, Ralph H. Johnson, Hans V. Hansen, and J. Anthony Blair are also prominent members of that move­ ment. Some informal logicians either eschew or simply do not use formal methods in their approach to argumentation, while others, such as David Hitchcock, use both formal and informal methods. Erik C.W. Krabbe is a logician who proudly defends a formal dialectical approach to argumentation. Daniel H. Cohen, Frans H. van Eemeren, Peter Houtlosser, Fred J. Kauffeld, C. Scott Jacobs, Christian Kock, Christian Plantin, Sorin Stati, Chris Reed, Douglas N.