Edited By Simone Bonnafous and Malika Temmar
VI. Analysing a debate. The contributions of argumentation study to political science - Juliette RENNES 93
93 Chapter VI Analysing controversy. The contributions of argumentation study to political science Juliette RENNES What is a political controversy? The answer to this question depends partly on which discipline is asking it. In political sociology, the defi- nition will tend to emphasise the process by which a polemic, relat- ing to a public decision or political action to be undertaken, moves away from its initial localised “arena” to affect a more general public [Cobb and Elder, 1972; Favre, 1992; Cefaï, 1996; Barthe, 2006 ]. In discourse analysis, stress will be laid upon the cluster of recurrent contradictory arguments which mark the discursive identity of the controversy across these different arenas of public debate. In this chapter, I would like to outline a few ways in which the first ap- proach can benefit from the second. By basing what I have to say more particularly on an argumentative and rhetorical analysis of what might be called equality controversies in democracy, I hope to cast a discursive light on a certain number of questions raised by political sociology. The life of a controversy is generally broken down into several phases, all of which give rise to a whole battery of sociological ques- tions. These relate to the conditions under which the controversy emerges, the configurations of actors supporting it, the series of posi- tions it creates and the partisan groupings established, as well as to the differences and shared features of the way it is formed into a militant, institutional and media...
You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.
This site requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals.
Do you have any questions? Contact us.Or login to access all content.