Abstract
The paper focuses on conflicts about an already negotiated compromise, taking as its example a debate in Dutch parliament about the approval of the Paris Agreement on climate change of 2015. It deals with a variety of worries that opponents of approval may advance and the arguments in its defense thus invited. It concludes with a profile of dialogue providing reasonable options for those involved in such a conflict.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Title of host publication | Argumentation and Inference |
Subtitle of host publication | Proceedings of the 2nd European Conference on Argumentation |
Editors | Steve Oswald, Didier Maillat |
Publisher | College Publications |
Chapter | 60 |
Pages | 887-907 |
Number of pages | 21 |
Volume | 2 |
ISBN (Print) | 978-1-84890-264-8 |
Publication status | Published - 2018 |
Event | 2nd European Conference on Argumentation - Fribourg, Switzerland Duration: 20-Jun-2017 → 23-Jun-2017 http://ecargument.org/?page_id=730 |
Publication series
Name | Studies in Logic: Logic and Argumentation |
---|---|
Publisher | College Publications |
Volume | 77 |
Conference
Conference | 2nd European Conference on Argumentation |
---|---|
Abbreviated title | ECA 2017 |
Country/Territory | Switzerland |
City | Fribourg |
Period | 20/06/2017 → 23/06/2017 |
Internet address |
Keywords
- argument schemes, compromise, criticisms, Paris Agreement, profile of dialogue, stock issues