Pressie en argumentatie in maatschappelijke discussies

Pressure and argumentation in public controversies
Discussants in a public controversy are also players in a social arena. Under
what circumstances can means of exerting pressure promote reasonable
outcomes, and when are they rather hindrances to their achievement? We
discuss the use of persuasion dialogues and negotiation dialogues by those
who aim at a reasonable outcome. We show how in a public controversy both
types of dialogue can be intertwined. Then, we examine in what ways participants in a public controversy can exert pressure on others. Finally, we discuss
whether these means of pressure hinder the achievement of a reasonable
outcome, both from the viewpoint of the pursuit of a resolution as well as
from that of the pursuit of a compromise. We conclude that exerting pressure
need not degenerate into committing a fallacy of either the type argumentum ad baculum or the type argumentum ad carotam.