【24h】

Abortion debates in Finland and the Republic of Ireland: textual analysis of experiential thinking and argumentation in parliamentary and layperson discussions

机译:芬兰和爱尔兰共和国的堕胎辩论:议会和守卫讨论的体验思想和论证的文本分析

获取原文

摘要

The ethical discussion about abortion has been polarized in Finland and the Republic of Ireland, two European countries with very different abortion legislation (liberal vs. highly restrictive). The aim of the present study was to analyze experiential thinking patterns and argumentative strategies in political and layperson debates regarding induced abortion. The content of Finnish and Irish texts (n?=?493), consisting of transcripts of parliamentary debates and online texts, such as blogs, was analyzed systematically. The texts were investigated for the aspects of experiential thinking, for selected argumentative moves and for any differences in the prevalence of these features between countries or between political vs. layperson debates. The Finnish and Irish discussions about induced abortion relied heavily on experiential thinking patterns and emotionally laden arguments instead of objective research data. This was evident in the very high prevalence of testimonials, narratives, loaded language and appeals to emotion in both political and layperson debates regardless of the country or the debater's position on abortion issue. Research data that did not support the position of the debater were relatively often omitted by confirmation bias. The Irish debaters appealed to popularity more often than the Finnish ones, while magical/religious thinking was mainly observed in the Finnish layperson discussion. The national history and the prevailing cultural and religious atmosphere of the two countries could explain these differences. The abortion debate mostly reinforces the opinions of one's peer group rather than convinces the opposite party to change their position. The stalemate and continuation of the same arguments being repeated could be associated with experiential thinking and emotional argumentative strategies in both political and layperson debates.
机译:关于堕胎的道德讨论已在芬兰和爱尔兰共和国的两次欧洲堕胎立法(自由主义与高度限制性)的两国偏离。本研究的目的是分析政治和加工辩论中的经验思维模式和争论策略,就造成的堕胎。芬兰语和爱尔兰文本的内容(n?=?493),系统地分析了议会辩论和在线文本的成绩单,例如博客,如博客。对于所选辩论举措的经验思想的方面,对这些特征的任何差异进行了调查的文本,以及各国之间或政治与守人辩论之间的这些特征的任何差异。关于诱导堕胎的芬兰和爱尔兰讨论严重依赖于体验思维模式和情绪载于的争论而不是客观的研究数据。这在辩论,叙事,加载语言的高度普及中是明显的,无论国家还是辩论的堕胎问题,在政治和拉德森辩论中对情绪的吸引力。不支持辩论的立场的研究数据相对往往通过确认偏差省略。爱尔兰辩论比芬兰人更频繁地吸引了普及,而在芬兰的守工园讨论中主要观察到神奇/宗教思维。两国的国家历史和普遍的文化和宗教气氛可以解释这些差异。堕胎辩论大多强化了一个同行小组的意见,而不是说服对方改变他们的立场。被重复的相同论点的僵局和延续可能与政治和加工辩论中的体验思维和情感辩论策略相关。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
站内服务
  • 写作辅导
  • 期刊发表
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号