Three Dimensions of Argument Cogency—A Contextualist Case Study
Three Dimensions of Argument Cogency—A Contextualist Case Study
In this chapter, the critical-contextualist approach is applied to a case study in which the findings of three expert committee reports on the possible links between diet and health are analyzed. Such committee reports sponsored by the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) are helpful in explaining the cogency of scientific argumentation. This case analysis, by using different source materials and argumentation-theoretic tools, highlights three directions of normative concern on the part of participants. These directions include the content of the reports, the quality of the committee transactions, and the public merits of the reports. The chapter concludes with the discussion of tensions in the rhetorical use of process ideals that are identified after examining the debates surrounding the reports and NAS procedures.
Keywords: critical-contextualist approach, scientific argumentation, NAS, case analysis, argument cogency, expert committee reports
MIT Press Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.
Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.
If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.
To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs, and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us.
