Americas’ conviction: arguing democracy in the affective episteme

IF 0.5 Q4 COMMUNICATION Argumentation and Advocacy Pub Date : 2022-10-02 DOI:10.1080/10511431.2022.2139088
Darrin Hicks, R. W. Greene
{"title":"Americas’ conviction: arguing democracy in the affective episteme","authors":"Darrin Hicks, R. W. Greene","doi":"10.1080/10511431.2022.2139088","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT We nominate conviction as a shared research problematic for argumentation scholarship in the Americas. Conviction has long been presumed as a constitutive feature of argumentation theory. Yet, important questions pertaining to the nature of conviction, how convictions are acquired, and conviction’s role in democratic governance have not received sustained attention. Using US President Joseph Biden’s address at the 2022 Summit of the Americas as a touchstone, we identify four distinct modalities of conviction – juridical, propositional, identitarian, and affective – which advocates articulate to advance strategic goals. Given the affective modality has received less attention from argumentation theorists, and the ever-increasing role affect plays in contemporary politics, we focus on explicating the affective modality and how it influences democratic governance and political activism in the Americas.","PeriodicalId":29934,"journal":{"name":"Argumentation and Advocacy","volume":"47 1","pages":"290 - 301"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Argumentation and Advocacy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10511431.2022.2139088","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACT We nominate conviction as a shared research problematic for argumentation scholarship in the Americas. Conviction has long been presumed as a constitutive feature of argumentation theory. Yet, important questions pertaining to the nature of conviction, how convictions are acquired, and conviction’s role in democratic governance have not received sustained attention. Using US President Joseph Biden’s address at the 2022 Summit of the Americas as a touchstone, we identify four distinct modalities of conviction – juridical, propositional, identitarian, and affective – which advocates articulate to advance strategic goals. Given the affective modality has received less attention from argumentation theorists, and the ever-increasing role affect plays in contemporary politics, we focus on explicating the affective modality and how it influences democratic governance and political activism in the Americas.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
美国的信念:在情感认知中论证民主
我们提名信念作为美洲论证学术的共同研究问题。定罪一直被认为是论证理论的一个基本特征。然而,与信念的性质、如何获得信念以及信念在民主治理中的作用有关的重要问题却没有得到持续的关注。以美国总统约瑟夫·拜登在2022年美洲峰会上的讲话为试金石,我们确定了四种不同的信念模式——司法的、命题的、认同的和情感的——倡导通过表达来推进战略目标。鉴于情感模态很少受到论证理论家的关注,而情感在当代政治中扮演着越来越重要的角色,我们将重点阐述情感模态及其如何影响美洲的民主治理和政治行动主义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
19
期刊最新文献
Can high school competitive debating facilitate political participation? The role of political knowledge and identification with a politically active group Nonverbal communication as argumentation: the case of political television debates The unnerved and unhoused: a rhetorical analysis of save Austin now’s campaign to disband unhoused individuals from Austin, Texas “Where were you shot?”: analyzing location rhetoric as strategic maneuvering in contemporary gun-control discourse Effective argumentation for action in health policy: a case study of the UK’s review on antimicrobial resistance
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1