Data di Pubblicazione:
2023
Abstract:
Starting from the motherland of the sociology of political communication, and building a
dialogical bridge with the heritage of political philosophy, the essay questions the concept
of “antisociality”, focusing on its meaning in connection to public arguments. Through an
in depth-analysis of the shortcomings derivable from the analysis of the argumentative and
ontological fallacy of composition already undertaken by Jon Elster in Logic and Society,
the author proposes an original conceptual framework that allows: 1) to distinguish clearly
between anti-social and a-social arguments; 2) to settle apart different notions of the
“we”, that might be implied in political arguments; 3) to avoid a reduction of the concept
of society to the sum of its parts, which is implicit in most rational choice paradigms. In
this way, the path is paved to apply a certain methodological approach to the analysis of
antisocial and a-social arguments, that drawing on the classical model first proposed by
Stephen Toulmin, allows a systematical evaluation of the richness and quality of both
factual and normative argumentation in the public sphere.
Tipologia CRIS:
1.1 Articolo in rivista
Keywords:
Antisocial Arguments, Asocial Arguments, Political Discourse Analysis, Fallacy
Of Composition, Jon Elster, Stephen Toulmin.
Elenco autori:
Corradi, Fiammetta
Link alla scheda completa:
Pubblicato in: