Thumbnail Image
Publication

Countering Questionable Tactics by Crying Foul

Innocenti, Beth
Citations
Altmetric:
Abstract
How do crying foul strategies, such as saying opponents are trying to "terrify" into a decision, pressure opponents to argue well? I submit that crying foul strategies work by making a norm determinate, and by making manifest the badness of the tactic and that the speaker is exercising forbearance. I explain why they generate pressure to repair or abandon questionable tactics, particularly when the norms they bring to bear in a situation converge with those of a broader political culture.
Description
This is the author's accepted manuscript, made available with permission of the American Forensic Association.
Date
2011
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
American Forensic Association
Collections
Communication Studies Scholarly Works
Show all metadata
Files
Thumbnail Image
Innocenti Countering Questionable.pdf
Adobe PDF, 343.4 KB
Research Projects
Organizational Units
Journal Issue
Keywords
Crying Foul, Normative Pragmatics, Fallacies, Questionable Tactics, Pragmatic Argumentation Theories
Citation
Innocenti, Beth. "Countering Questionable Tactics by Crying Foul." Argumentation and Advocacy 47 (2011): 178-88.
URI
https://hdl.handle.net/1808/8329
DOI
Embedded videos