Argumentative Bluff in Eristic Discussion: An Analysis and Evaluation

Jan Albert van Laar*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

2 Citations (Scopus)
320 Downloads (Pure)


How does the analysis and evaluation of argumentation depend on the dialogue type in which the argumentation has been put forward? This paper focuses on argumentative bluff in eristic discussion. Argumentation cannot be presented without conveying the pretence that it is dialectically reasonable, as well as, at least to some degree, rhetorically effective. Within eristic discussion it can be profitable to engage in bluff with respect to such claims. However, it will be argued that such bluffing is dialectically inadmissible, even within an eristic discussion.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)383-398
Number of pages16
Issue number3
Publication statusPublished - Aug-2010


  • Argumentative bluff
  • Eristic discussion
  • Critical discussion
  • Dialogue types
  • Fallacies

Cite this