This paper represents a case study of the types of fallacies that may occur in the argumentation stage of an ethical dispute over abortion. The theoretical framework I use is the pragma-dialectical theory of argumentation (van Eemeren and Grootendorst 1992, 2004) which conceives of fallacies as violations of the rules for critical discussion. I will focus on the fallacies resulting from the violation of the relevance rule in two fragments of argumentative texts illustrating opposing positions on abortion. I claim that these fallacies function as winning strategies in the ethical dispute in case.
Lista citărilor/referințelor nu cuprinde decît texte prezente în baza de date, nefiind deci exhaustivă. Pentru trimiterea de texte, semnalarea oricăror greșeli, și eventualul refuz ca „Diacronia” să facă publice textele, vă rugăm să folosiți adresa de email [Please enable javascript to view.].
pdf 
html 
