Ten Fair-Play Principles in Argumentation

Radu Atanasiu
Additional contact information
Radu Atanasiu: Bucharest International School of Management

Chapter Chapter 13 in Critical Thinking for Managers, 2021, pp 163-165 from Springer

Abstract: Abstract What is the purpose of argumentation? To win? Clearly, winning or losing an argument usually has consequences. These consequences can be less important, such as you having to do a small task that should have been done by your teammate, or very important, like your innocent client spending time in prison, if you are a bad lawyer. Whatever the case, the ultimate purpose of a dispute should be the truth and finding the best solution. Not winning. In an ideal world, all disputes would be conducted in a spirit of fair play. In a fair-play conversation, each participant enters with the willingness to convince the other, while allowing the possibility to be convinced herself. If people kept that in mind, the world would be a better place: a little dry, but better. However, in this less-than-ideal but fascinating world we live in, discussions often take wrong turns, so I have put together 10 fair-play rules to be remembered and hopefully followed in debates.

Date: 2021
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

There are no downloads for this item, see the EconPapers FAQ for hints about obtaining it.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:mgmchp:978-3-030-73600-2_13

Ordering information: This item can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/9783030736002

DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-73600-2_13

Access Statistics for this chapter

More chapters in Management for Professionals from Springer
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().