Actually Existing Rules for Closing Arguments

Abstract

Our interest in argumentation is provoked at least in part by the apparent paradox it presents. People are arguing because they disagree, sometimes deeply. But despite their disagreement, their transaction is orderly – at least, somewhat orderly. Furthermore, this orderliness apparently has a normative element; it establishes grounds for participants to critique each other’s conduct as good and bad. How is this normative orderliness achieved, even in the face of disagreement? – That must be a central question for any theory, especially one that aims to deepen our understanding of the normative pragmatics of arguing (Goodwin, 2002, 2007; Jacobs, 1999; van Eemeren, 1994).