Rhetorical Validity: An Analysis of Three Perspectives on the Justification of Rhetorical Argument

Ray E. McKerrow

26 citations0/0 files storedArgumentation and Advocacy

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Linguistics and Discourse Analysis Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics Rhetoric and Communication Studies

Abstract

Arguments function to justify rather than to verify their claims. This essay reviews attributes common to rhetorical argument, proposes a definition of rhetorical validity as “pragmatic justification,” and illustrates the operation of this generic definition within three contemporary approaches to the validation of rhetorical discourse. It is argued that the determination of justification is premised on a common set of assumptions.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 26 citations exist upstream.

References

1971The New Rhetoric: A Treatise on Argumentation 1972Rhetorical sensitivity and social interaction 1967Readings in Existential Phenomenology 1970Argument as method: Its nature, its limitations and its uses

Cited by

1984Narration as a human communication paradigm: The case of public moral argument 2015The Philosophy of Argument and Audience Reception 2020Running field experiments using Facebook split test 2023The Making of Argumentation Theory: A Pragma-dialectical View

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.