Connection premises: Their character, criticism, and defence

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapterAcademic


By presenting an argument, a proponent commits himself or herself to the adequacy of the connection between the argument’s premises and its conclusion. What is this connection, and when is it adequate? I deal with these questions by using insights and techniques from dialectical approaches to argumentation. First, I show that by advancing an argument, the proponent commits himself or herself to its connection proposition, which does not generalize upon the conclusion and premises. When a challenge turns this connection proposition into a connection premise, there may be a particularist defence available, so that the proponent need not commit himself or herself to any generalization of it. Second, I pay attention to situations where the proponent does choose to support the connection premise by means of a general argumentation scheme, showing there to be a variety of ways to justify that scheme.
Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationArgumentation across Communities of Practice
Subtitle of host publicationMulti-disciplinary perspectives
EditorsCornelia Ilie, Giuliana Garzone
PublisherJohn Benjamins Publishers
Number of pages8
ISBN (Electronic)9789027265173
ISBN (Print)9789027211279
Publication statusPublished - 2017

Publication series

NameArgumentation in Context
PublisherJohn Benjamins Publishing Company
ISSN (Print)1877-6884

Cite this