Formal Dialectic: From Aristotle to Pragma-Dialectics, and Beyond

摘要

What is formal dialectic? And in what sense can it be related to both Aristotle and to pragma-dialectics? What is lying beyond? And what is pragma-dialectics? Let us take these questions one by one, with apologies to whom this will be all old hat. The term "dialectic," you may be reassured or disappointed to hear, does not refer to idealist or materialist dialectical philosophy, but simply to the practice and theory of conversation. Formal dialecticians may deal with any kind of conversation, or any type of dialogue, trying to build a formal model of the practice: a formal dialectical system. What do I mean by "formal"? When is a dialectical system formal? To count as formal, a dialectical system must at least be formal in the regulative sense: it must be rule-governed or regimented. But it will usually be formal in other senses as well. Often it is also formal in the linguistic sense: its locutions are rigorously determined by grammatical rules, as in a programming language. And most often a formal dialectical system will moreover be formal in the a priori sense: its rules are selected a priori rather than being the outcome of empirical investigations.