Full text
| |
| Author(s): |
Cleide Lucia da Cunha Rizerio e Silva
Total Authors: 1
|
| Document type: | Doctoral Thesis |
| Press: | São Paulo. |
| Institution: | Universidade de São Paulo (USP). Faculdade de Filosofia, Letras e Ciências Humanas (FFLCH/SBD) |
| Defense date: | 2013-06-26 |
| Examining board members: |
Zilda Gaspar Oliveira de Aquino;
Leonor Lopes Favero;
Paulo Roberto Gonçalves Segundo;
José Gaston Hilgert;
William Augusto Menezes
|
| Advisor: | Zilda Gaspar Oliveira de Aquino |
| Abstract | |
This paper deals with political debate, in order to analyze if the opinions are truly the aim of this kind of discourse and some of the strategic arguments, that can be understand as fallacies, would be find. At the Pragma-dialectical approach of argumentation (van Eemeren e Grootendorst: 1984, 1992, 2004) the concept of fallacies could be better understood as one impediment to the resolution of a disagreement. The theory proposes ten rules for the conduct of an ideal model of a critical discussion. A fallacy is a violation of one of the ten rules. Generically, such fallacies are moves which disrupt or derail the process of rationally resolving an expressed difference of opinion. A fallacy can happen in the various stages of a critical discussion by the performance of speech acts: comissives, directives, expressive and declaratives. The methodology is the observation of the speech acts of the participants on a debate in order to verify the fallacies that can occur. Political debates from 2008, for the mayor of Sao Paulo election is the corpus selected. (AU) | |