When advancing legal argumentation, judges should follow the judicial principle of "taking facts as the basis and law as the criteria." This is essential for justice to be seen to be done. Studies on the discursive realization of the principle in legal argumentation is quite limited. Semantic gravity (SG) from Legitimation Code Theory deals with degrees of context-dependence of meaning in social practice. This study explores the evaluation of how the judicial principle is practiced by judges in discourse, using SG to investigate context-dependence of meanings in legal argumentation in Chinese judicial judgements. The analysis mainly reveals that legal argumentation goes through several phases with different strengths of SG, including introducing, assembling, arguing, subsuming, stating, interpreting and responding, and that legal argumentation often takes forms of semantic waves: a wave with a broader range between the highest and lowest strengths of SG indicates both the factual and the legal aspects of the judicial principle are realized in the argumentative discourse. The dynamics of SG can be used to reveal the extent of discursive adherence to the principle in legal argumentation.
A persuasive political orator constructs valid arguments and effectively delivers the arguments in political discourse. Robert Mangaliso Sobukwe was such an orator. This article pays attention to Sobukwe's speech, Facing Fearful Odds, which he delivered in Basutoland, during the Basutoland Congress Party conference in December 1957. The article combines social constructivism, and Aristotle's persuasive strategies that invoke rational, emotional, and ethical appeals, to develop a framework, which examines how constructivist arguments are effectively raised in political discourse. Claim, data, warrant, and rhetorical devices are used to analyze the construction of arguments in the speech. Sobukwe's speech aimed at creating Basotho unity to achieve Basutoland's political liberation. It depicted colonization as an obstacle to African unity; the liberation struggle as a battle for the redemption and regeneration of Basutoland; and unity as the key ingredient for the success of the Basutoland liberation struggle. The article demonstrates Sobukwe's effective use of constructs and rhetorical strategies to achieve his objectives. Hence it contributes to constructivist perspectives on African anticolonial discourse. The conclusion indicates the relevance of Sobukwe's views to contemporary politics in Africa.
Existing scholarship has emphasized the material significance and persuasive potential of self-immolation. However, given that the majority of self-immolations fail to garner sustained public attention, this essay seeks to further understanding into why certain extreme acts of bodily rhetoric gain entry into the public imagination while others are largely extinguished from view. To account for the rhetorical salience of certain self-immolations, this essay explores what I refer to as the postmortem enthymeme. Understood as a proof for which audiences are required to fill in premises and/or the conclusion, the enthymeme helps to explain how the non-discursive qualifies and functions as an argument. When rhetors engage in bodily forms of argument resulting in death, audiences are often afforded considerable power in determining the significance and meaning of actors and events. The postmortem enthymeme therefore encourages scholars to critically interrogate the role of filled-in values and assumptions in hegemonic determinations of whose deaths are permitted to matter and why. To illuminate this construct, I present a rhetorical analysis of public reactions to the self-immolation of Mohamed Bouazizi in English-language news coverage.
What is the function of "therefore" and other similar expressions such as "so," "thus," when used in the presentation of an argument? In this paper, I highlight two independent functions of "therefore" when so used. First, it may function as a conclusion indicator. That is, "therefore" can be used to serialize a list of propositions into premises and conclusion, thereby highlighting a structure that is determinative of an argument. Second, "therefore" may function as an inference-claim designator. In general, an inference claim says that the premises of the associated argument constitute a reason for adopting a specific propositional attitude toward the conclusion or for doing what it prescribes. My main task here is developing an account of this two-fold function of "therefore." The primary takeaway is clarification of when and how uses of "therefore" (or similar expressions) in presenting arguments are indicative of the nature of arguing. When a speaker merely uses "therefore" as a conclusion indicator, they present an argument without thereby arguing for the conclusion. However, an arguer's use of "therefore" as an inference-claim designator registers their intention to use the associated argument in a reason-giving way. This intention is an essential element of an arguer's act of arguing for the conclusion. Since an arguer's use of "therefore" as an inference-claim designator is indicative of their intention so understood, clarifying the semantic and pragmatic determinants of the inference claim expressed by "therefore" on a given use is a means of clarifying the nature of the associated arguing.
This paper investigates how EU institutions use the periphrastic passive to manage agency and responsibility in policymaking. Combining pragma-dialectical and micro-linguistic approaches, it explores how passive becomes a discursive strategy to negotiate the relationship problem/solution in contexts characterized by complex environmental and social challenges. The analysis is based on the EU Strategy for Sustainable and Circular Textiles, which serves as a case study to illustrate broader argumentative and linguistic patterns observable across policy domains. Results reveal that periphrastic passives most often appear in argumentative segments, typically connected to final-instrumental/termination and definition loci. The findings shed light on how linguistic backgrounding supports argumentation in institutional discourse and frames responsibility in EU sustainability policy, with implications beyond the textile sector.
This theoretical paper introduces a novel framework of counter-narrative pedagogies designed to enhance critical argumentation skills as a defense against educational misinformation proliferating on social media platforms. Drawing from critical pedagogy theory, narrative persuasion research, and contemporary media literacy scholarship, this study employs systematic literature synthesis and theoretical framework development methodology to create a comprehensive pedagogical approach that empowers learners to construct, deconstruct, and counter misleading educational narratives. The framework integrates three core components: narrative identification and analysis, argumentative reconstruction, and counter-narrative construction, each supported by specific pedagogical strategies and assessment criteria. Through systematic integration of 40 peer-reviewed sources (90% from 2019-2025), this study addresses critical gaps in existing media literacy approaches while providing practical implementation guidelines for educators across diverse cultural contexts. The theoretical validation process demonstrates logical coherence, empirical grounding through existing intervention research, and practical applicability for addressing contemporary misinformation challenges. This conceptual contribution addresses the growing crisis of educational misinformation while advancing theoretical understanding of how pedagogical practices can foster critical consciousness in digital learning environments. The implications extend beyond individual media literacy to encompass broader educational equity, democratic participation, and institutional transformation in the digital age. Future empirical validation through classroom interventions and cross-cultural implementation studies will further strengthen the framework's practical utility.
Greater political knowledge is associated with higher levels of political capital. Often attributed to socialized gender norms, men have been found to possess a political knowledge advantage over women. Extending research on this topic, the present study explores how the cognitive process of elaboration relates to continued gender disparities in political knowledge, interest, and information efficacy. Relying on data gathered during a 2020 and a 2024 presidential debate, this essay proposes the term gendered political elaboration to denote the mechanism through which the gender knowledge gap may subsequently contribute to inequitable learning outcomes from the consumption of political debate messages. Results indicate that women tended to possess lower political knowledge, interest, and information efficacy, factors in this study which mediated levels of elaboration. Accordingly, identifying as a woman negatively influenced one's elaboration and was associated with disparate learning outcomes along gender lines. In sum, interventions related to the inequitable social cultivation of political aptitude and interest are likely warranted as is further research into how message priming and framing may help to mitigate gendered political elaboration and produce more equitable conditions for democratic learning.
This essay examines OpenAI's custom GPT builder as a tool for designing custom chatbots to supplement debate practice and pedagogy. Employing a SWOT analysis informed by principles of IPDA debate, human-computer interaction (HCI), and experiential learning theory (ELT), this research evaluates the effectiveness of OpenAI's custom GPT builder and the functionality of a set of custom debate chatbots created and managed through the builder's interface. To that end, three custom chatbots - The Real Debate Buddy IV (DB4), Debate Robopanel, and IPDA Robopro - are developed and tested. Analyses reveal that while the builder facilitates efficient chatbot creation, certain limitations impact utility and viability. Despite these limitations, analyses suggest that the builder and its products present more potential advantages than disadvantages. This essay contributes to the growing discourse on AI in education, demonstrating that viable custom debate chatbots can be easily constructed and that, on balance, real and potential strengths and opportunities outweigh threats and weaknesses for IPDA debate practitioners. The case is made for continued refinement and critical assessment of AI tools in the context of competitive debate.
This study investigates the pedagogical effectiveness of structured debate, implemented through the World Schools Debate Championship (WSDC) model, as an active learning strategy in high school physics education. Conducted by the ST2 research group at Politecnico di Milano, the pilot involved 47 students and examined whether debate can enhance conceptual understanding of energy and foster metacognitive reflection. Using a pre-post within-subject design, students participated in a ten-hour instructional program combining conceptual review, argumentation training, and a structured debate on the motion "The European Union should prioritize nuclear energy research over renewable energy research." Statistical analyses of pre- and post-test results revealed a significant improvement in conceptual understanding (p = 0.0003), with large effect sizes (Cohen's d = 0.81; AKP = 0.80) confirmed through both classical and robust t-tests. Qualitative observations indicated that the debate promoted reflective reasoning, evidence-based argumentation, and the application of physics concepts to real-world issues. These findings provide preliminary empirical support for debate as a viable, evidence-based pedagogy that integrates cognitive, metacognitive, and communicative dimensions of learning. The study contributes to physics education research by demonstrating that debate-based instruction can yield substantial conceptual gains within limited instructional time, suggesting promising directions for its broader curricular adoption.
Debate clubs are a popular extracurricular activity among Croatian high school students, as debate is thought to develop various key competencies. However, there is an ongoing debate about whether an emphasis on competition undermines these benefits. To examine this, we grounded our study in goal orientation theory. We surveyed 175 high school debaters (73.1% girls), representing most competitive debaters in Croatia. Students assessed the development of 16 competencies through debating and reported their goal orientations. We explored the relationships between four goal orientations and competence-development. Results demonstrated that most competencies were positively associated with mastery-approach goals. In contrast, performance goals generally did not significantly predict competence-development and were negatively linked to tolerance and bearing with defeat. Mastery-avoidance and performance-avoidance goals showed no significant relationships with competencies. These findings partly support the view that focusing on learning, rather than competition, leads to better student outcomes. However, they also highlight the complexity of these dynamics, as not all mastery goals have positive association to competence development and goal orientations are interrelated. The study also offered important insights for debate coaches and practitioners.
This article assesses the tu quoque version of the ad hominem fallacy by comparing media coverage of the war that began on February 24, 2022, in Russia, Ukraine, and the United States with speeches by Russia's President Putin. The contents of newsfeeds covering the war, produced by three major media outlets-Gazeta.ru, Ukrainska Pravda, and CNN-were analyzed during the first seven weeks of the war. It is shown that the reasons for waging war stated by Russia's President Putin diverged from messages propagated by the Russian media outlet during the first month and a half of Russia's large-scale invasion of Ukraine, despite the tight control exercised by the government over mass media. Neither the Ukrainian nor American media outlets picked up Putin's arguments. This situation indicates a fallacious character of Putin's rhetoric.
This paper examines "going cognitive" as mode of evasion in public argument. That is, it considers how pointing toward thoughts, intents, beliefs, and so forth, can be a means to avoid other, more difficult, matters. It analyzes statements delivered following the non-indictment decision in two police killings of unarmed black men, Michael Brown and Eric Garner, those released by or on behalf of the police officers and by then-president Barack Obama. In each case, "going cognitive" serves to avert difficult, risky, or personally damaging issues. As evasive move, it generates some of the silences we find with respect to race in public argument.
Despite claims that academic debate fosters civic engagement, empirical evidence remains limited-especially at the junior high and high school level. Using data from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent to Adult Health (Add Health), this study investigates whether debate participation in adolescence predicts civic and political involvement among young adults. Drawing on this nationally representative sample of U.S. youth, debaters and non-debaters are compared on a range of outcomes including civic engagement, nonelectoral political activity, voting behavior, and ideological orientation. Multivariate models control for gender and social class. Results show that young debaters were significantly more likely to volunteer as adolescents and engage in civic and political organizations, non-electoral political activity, and voter registration into early adulthood-patterns that persist even after accounting for background characteristics. These findings offer nationally generalizable evidence to long-standing claims about the democratic value of academic forensics.
In 2021, Washington D.C.'s Restore the Vote Amendment Act went into effect, lifting restrictions on voting rights such that felony convictions would no longer impact a district resident's ability to vote. Leading up to the successful passing of this law, the Washington D.C. City Council held several public hearings where interested parties could submit testimonies providing their stance on the policy. In this study, I combine quantitative data from coding messaging tools with qualitative examples from the comments to demonstrate the persuasiveness and methodical approach to crafting a public testimony. Findings indicate that public commenters rely on language that emphasizes the physical place a person is located (e.g. prisoner), extensive usage of rational appeals primarily through fact-based evidence and statistics, and reliance on framing tools such as defining the problem and making moral judgments. Additionally, I found that commenters focused on their struggle for statehood and distance from prisons to further underscore the urgency and relevancy of the cause.
The 2024 presidential campaign provides a unique opportunity to examine candidates' articulated images of presidential leadership and compare historical trends regarding the state of American presidential discourse. Addressing both issues, this research examined the 2024 presidential debates from the perspective of politeness theory, extending a program of research into presidential debates from 1960 to 2020. This study revealed several findings. First, the strategies used by the three candidates were found to be significantly different in the two debates of 2024, and different from their previous debate performances. This reflects strategic choices on the part of the candidates in the construction of their political images and in strategies to diminish the appeal of their opponents. Second, we found that the candidates' use of disagreement predicted increases in candidates' un-favorability scores but claims focusing on generalized difference predicted higher polling. Finally, in comparing our results to previous campaigns, we found the 2024 debates reflected a sustained level of aggression achieved in the last three campaign cycles corresponding with the emergence of Trump as a national U.S. political leader.
"Intercollegiate Policy Debate, A Decade in Review" previews the contributions of scholars in the special issue who attend to persistent and emergent controversies within the activity. We argue that these essays showcase complex intersections between the practices of intercollegiate policy debate and broader societal cleavages and scholarly conversations. We suggest that intercollegiate policy debate can serve as a microcosm of academic inquiry, and encourage scholars from both within and outside of intercollegiate policy debate to take notice and continue to critically examine, appraise, and engage with the trends and practices of the activity.
More than 27 years after the collapse of the Soviet Union, the former Eastern Bloc country of Latvia decided to publish the KGB archival documents that had been left in the country before the fall of the USSR. Upon the 2018 release of these files, transnational discourse surrounding the publication illustrated Latvia's struggle to navigate the crossroads between its post-Soviet and emerging democratic identities. This paper compares Latvian, US, and Russian media representations of the Latvian KGB archival release and explores how these files constitute competing accounts of Latvia's agency on the international stage. When paired dialectically for analysis, the local and international journalistic coverage surrounding the archival release demonstrates how three themes of surveillance, democratic idealism, and transparency interact transnationally between these countries. Additionally, the themes provide rhetorical scholars a lens through which they can understand the event's significance for navigating post-Soviet identities and the process of lustration.
