Overview
- Presents a ground-breaking take on the question of public controversy in the democratic space
- Offers an innovating approach to rhetoric: how to achieve coexistence in dissent
- Illuminates the regulating functions of polemical exchanges in our pluralistic democracies
Part of the book series: Argumentation Library (ARGA, volume 42)
Access this book
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Other ways to access
Table of contents (8 chapters)
-
Front Matter
-
Theoretical Considerations
-
Front Matter
-
-
How Do Polemics and Public Controversy Work? Looking at Debates on Women in the Public Sphere
-
Front Matter
-
-
Reason, Passion, and Violence
-
Front Matter
-
-
Back Matter
Keywords
- Polemical Discourse
- Public Controversy
- Public Sphere
- Pluralistic Democracy
- Deep Disagreement
- Rhetoric of Dissent
- Conflict Resolution
- Argumentation and Emotion
- Verbal Violence
- Political Debates
- Polemical Exchanges in Pluralistic Democracies
- Exclusion of Women from the Public Space
- Managing Disagreement in Democracy
- Rhetoric of Dissent
- What is Polemical Discourse
- Confrontational Management of Dissent
About this book
This book revisits the definition of polemical discourse and deals with its functions in the democratic sphere. It first examines theoretical questions concerning the management of disagreement in democracy and the nature of polemical discourse. Next, it analyses case studies involving such issues as the place of women in the public space, illustrated by the case of the burqa in France and public controversy in the media on the exclusion of women from the public space. The book then explores reason, passion and violence in polemical discourse by means of cases involving confrontations between secular and ultra-orthodox circles, controversies about the Mexican Wall and fierce discussions about stock-options, and bonuses in times of financial crisis.
Although polemical exchanges in the public sphere exacerbate dissent instead of resolving conflicts, they are quite frequent in the media and on the Net. How can we explain such a paradox? Most studies in argumentation avoid the question: they mainly focus on the verbal procedures leading to agreement. This focus stems from the centrality conferred upon consensus in our democratic societies, where decisions should be the result of a process of deliberation. What is then the social function of a confrontational management of dissent that does not primarily seek to achieve agreement? Is it just a sign of decadence, failure and powerlessness, or does it play a constructive role? This book answers these questions.
Reviews
Authors and Affiliations
About the author
Ruth Amossy (Tel-Aviv University) is a leading scholar in the field of Argumentation and Discourse Analysis, and the Chief editor of the French journal Argumentation et Analyse du discours. She published extensively on argumentation in its relation to Discourse Analysis, on various theoretical issues in the field of rhetorical argumentation, DA and political discourse, on stereotypes and on ethos. She is the coordinator of ADARR.
Bibliographic Information
Book Title: In Defense of Polemics
Authors: Ruth Amossy
Translated by: Olga Kirschbaum
Series Title: Argumentation Library
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-85210-8
Publisher: Springer Cham
eBook Packages: Education, Education (R0)
Copyright Information: Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021
Hardcover ISBN: 978-3-030-85209-2Published: 30 September 2021
Softcover ISBN: 978-3-030-85212-2Published: 18 October 2022
eBook ISBN: 978-3-030-85210-8Published: 29 September 2021
Series ISSN: 1566-7650
Series E-ISSN: 2215-1907
Edition Number: 1
Number of Pages: IX, 166
Number of Illustrations: 1 b/w illustrations, 3 illustrations in colour
Topics: Discourse Analysis, Communication Studies, Logic, Political Science