Premium
Argument versus dialogue: a response to Luepnitz, Madigan and other argumentative authors
Author(s) -
Snyder Maryhelen
Publication year - 1993
Publication title -
journal of family therapy
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.52
H-Index - 45
eISSN - 1467-6427
pISSN - 0163-4445
DOI - 10.1111/j.1467-6427.1993.00744.x
Subject(s) - argumentative , argument (complex analysis) , context (archaeology) , habit , task (project management) , space (punctuation) , epistemology , psychology , social psychology , sociology , argumentation theory , linguistics , medicine , history , philosophy , management , archaeology , economics
In the context of family therapy's task of serving families, the purpose of theorizing is ultimately practical. It is a prevailing cultural practice among intellectuals to use up a vast amount of ‘space’ in our brains and in the pages of our journals theorizing at a great distance from the practical. One of the reasons for this distance from the practical may be the sophistic habit of argumentativeness. An alternative is proposed in which priority is given to the practical and dialogue is focused on the co‐creation of meanings.