| Acknowledgments | p. xi |
| Introduction | p. 1 |
| Logic, Dialectic, and Rhetoric | p. 7 |
| The Viewpoint of Informal Logic | p. 8 |
| The Old Dialectic of the Greeks | p. 11 |
| The Opposition between Rhetoric and Dialectic | p. 15 |
| Topics and Fallacies | p. 19 |
| Persuasion, Social Influence, and Democracy | p. 23 |
| Argumentation Schemes | p. 26 |
| Basic Practical Reasoning | p. 30 |
| Value-Based Practical Reasoning | p. 34 |
| The Star Trek Example | p. 37 |
| The Aims of Dialectical and Rhetorical Argumentation | p. 41 |
| The Speech Act of Persuasion | p. 46 |
| The Belief-Desire-Intention Approach and the Commitment Approach | p. 47 |
| Basic Components of Persuasion | p. 53 |
| Chaining of Argumentation | p. 56 |
| Types of Dialogue | p. 60 |
| Deliberation | p. 64 |
| Closing of the Deliberation Dialogue | p. 66 |
| Acts of Persuasion, Inducement, and Making a Threat | p. 69 |
| Negotiation Dialogue and Persuasion | p. 73 |
| Relevance and Argument Diagramming | p. 79 |
| The Cognitive Component of Persuasion | p. 84 |
| The New Definition of the Speech Act of Persuasion | p. 87 |
| Propaganda | p. 91 |
| Negative Connotations | p. 92 |
| Public Discourse and Reason | p. 96 |
| Appeal to the People Revisited | p. 99 |
| The Dialectical Viewpoint on Propaganda | p. 104 |
| Persuasion and Propaganda | p. 106 |
| Characteristics of Propaganda | p. 109 |
| Is Propaganda Necessarily Dishonest or Irrational? | p. 114 |
| Openness to Contrary Evidence | p. 117 |
| Deceptiveness and Relevance in Propaganda | p. 120 |
| Evaluating Argumentation in Propaganda | p. 122 |
| Appeals to Fear and Pity | p. 127 |
| Appeals to Fear and Pity in Mass Media | p. 128 |
| Appeals to Fear | p. 131 |
| Appeals to Pity | p. 134 |
| The Respondent-to-Dialogue Problem | p. 138 |
| Simulative Reasoning | p. 142 |
| The Dual Process Model of Persuasion | p. 145 |
| The Structure of Appeals to Fear | p. 147 |
| The Structure of Appeals to Pity | p. 150 |
| Multi-agent Structure of Both Types of Argument | p. 153 |
| When Are Appeals to Fear and Pity Fallacious? | p. 156 |
| Ad Hominem Arguments in Political Discourse | p. 161 |
| Classifying the Types of Ad Hominem Argument | p. 163 |
| The Circumstantial and Other Types | p. 165 |
| Argument from Commitment | p. 169 |
| The Gore Case | p. 173 |
| The Battalino Case | p. 177 |
| Classifying the Argument in the Battalino Case | p. 180 |
| Evaluating the Argument in the Battalino Case | p. 183 |
| Implicature and Innuendo | p. 185 |
| Evaluating the Argument in the Gore Case | p. 190 |
| Evaluating the Arguments Rhetorically and Dialectically | p. 192 |
| Arguments Based on Popular Opinion | p. 198 |
| Influencing the Mass Audience | p. 199 |
| Appeal to Popular Opinion as an Argument | p. 202 |
| Cases in Point | p. 204 |
| The Form of the Argument | p. 207 |
| Fallacious Appeals to Popular Opinion | p. 211 |
| Endoxa in Greek Dialectic | p. 213 |
| Public Opinion as Informed Deliberation | p. 215 |
| A More Careful Basis for Evaluating Cases | p. 218 |
| Viewing the Public as an Agent | p. 222 |
| Evaluating Appeal to Popular Opinion | p. 224 |
| Fallacies and Bias in Public Opinion Polling | p. 228 |
| Definitions and Sampling Surveys | p. 229 |
| Question Wording and Emotive Bias in Polls | p. 235 |
| The Structure of the Question | p. 239 |
| Forcing an Answer | p. 244 |
| Use of Polls by Advocacy Groups | p. 249 |
| The Advent of Deliberative Polling | p. 254 |
| Argumentation Schemes and Critical Questions | p. 259 |
| Using Formal Dialectical Models of Argumentation | p. 263 |
| Combining Dialectical and Empirical Methods | p. 267 |
| Conclusion and Summary of Fallacies | p. 270 |
| Persuasive Definitions and Public Policy Arguments | p. 275 |
| Stevenson's Theory of Persuasive Definitions | p. 276 |
| Cases of Public Redefinitions | p. 281 |
| Wider Implications of These Cases | p. 288 |
| Definitions in the New Dialectic | p. 292 |
| Proof of Legitimacy of Persuasive Definitions | p. 297 |
| Argumentation Schemes Relating to Definitions | p. 300 |
| The Speech Act of Defining | p. 308 |
| Evaluating Persuasive Definitions | p. 310 |
| What Should the Rules for Persuasive Definitions Be? | p. 316 |
| Conclusions | p. 319 |
| The Structure of Media Argumentation | p. 323 |
| Rhetoric and Dialectic Reconfigured | p. 324 |
| The Respondent-to-Dialogue Problem Revisited | p. 327 |
| Direct and Indirect Media Argumentation | p. 330 |
| Star Trek: The Rhetorical Dimension | p. 334 |
| Argumentation Strategies | p. 338 |
| Plan Recognition | p. 342 |
| The Solution to the RTD Problem | p. 347 |
| Fifteen Basic Components of Media Argumentation | p. 350 |
| The Persuasion System | p. 353 |
| Computational Dialectics for Rhetorical Invention | p. 355 |
| Bibliography | p. 361 |
| Index | p. 373 |
| Table of Contents provided by Ingram. All Rights Reserved. |
