Notice of Books Received 

 

As previously announced, with this issue we adopt a policy of 

providing brief notifications of books received in the last four years. 

Each notice will not exceed 150 words. 

Here, we provide details of three books for which we have received 

notices from authors or publishers, along with a list of the books we 

have reviewed since 2014. As also mentioned, books for which 

notices are provided may be reviewed in a later issue. 

 

 

HAMPLE, DALE (2018) Interpersonal Arguing. New York: Peter 

Lang. pp. 301. 

 

This book is an accessible review of scholarship on key elements of 

face-to-face arguing, which is the interpersonal exchange of reasons. 

Topics include frames for understanding the nature of arguing, 

argument situations, serial arguments, argument dialogues, and 

international differences in how people understand interpersonal 

arguing. This is a thorough survey of the leading issues involved in 

understanding how people argue with one another. 

 

 

 VAN EEMEREN, FRANS. H. (2018) Argumentation Theory: A 

Pragma-Dialectical Perspective. Argumentation Library series. 

Springer. pp.199. 

 

The book offers a compact but comprehensive introductory 

overview of the crucial components of argumentation theory. In 

presenting this overview, argumentation is consistently approached 

from a pragma-dialectical perspective by viewing it pragmatically as 

a goal-directed communicative activity and dialectically as part of a 

regulated critical exchange aimed at resolving a difference of 

opinion. The book also systematically explains how the constitutive 

parts of the pragma-dialectical theory of argumentation hang 

together. 

 



 The following topics are discussed: (1) argumentation theory as a 

discipline; (2) the meta-theoretical principles of pragma-dialectics; 

(3) the model of a critical discussion aimed at resolving a difference 

of opinion; (4) fallacies as violations of a code of conduct for 

reasonable argumentative discourse; (5) descriptive research of 

argumentative reality; (6) analysis as theoretically-motivated 

reconstruction; (7) strategic manoeuvring aimed at combining 

achieving effectiveness with maintaining reasonableness; (8) the 

conventionalization of argumentative practices; (9) prototypical 

argumentative patterns; (10) pragma-dialectics amidst other 

approaches. 

 

 

HITCHCOCK, DAVID. (2017). On Reasoning and Argument: Essays 

in Informal Logic and Critical Thinking. Cham, Switzerland: 

Springer. Pp. xxvii, 553. 

 

This book brings together in one place David Hitchcock’s most 

significant published articles on reasoning and argument. In seven 

new chapters he updates his thinking in the light of subsequent 

scholarship. Collectively, the papers articulate a distinctive position 

in the philosophy of argumentation. 

 

Among other things, the author: 

 

• develops an account of “material consequence” that permits 

evaluation of inferences without problematic postulation of unstated 

premises. 

• updates his recursive definition of argument that accommodates 

chaining and embedding of arguments and allows any type of 

illocutionary act to be a conclusion.  

• advances a general theory of relevance. 

• provides comprehensive frameworks for evaluating inferences in 

reasoning by analogy, means-end reasoning, and appeals to 

considerations or criteria. 

• argues that none of the forms of arguing ad hominem is a fallacy. 

• describes proven methods of teaching critical thinking effectively. 

 



 

OLMOS, PAULA (Ed.). (2017). Narration as Argument. Cham, 

Switzerland: Springer. Pp. xii, 1-234. 

 

This collection of essays has achieved to gather an international 

group of scholars, mainly, but not exclusively, from the field of 

Argumentation Theory, and put together an anthology of eleven 

original chapters on Narration as Argument from different 

perspectives. It presents reflections on the relationship between 

narratives and argumentative discourse, focusing on their functional 

and structural similarities and dissimilarities, and offering diverse 

conceptual tools for analyzing the narratives’ potential power for 

justification, explanation and persuasion. The first Part, under the 

title “Narratives as Sources of Knowledge and Argument”, includes 

five chapters addressing general, theoretical and philosophical 

issues, related to the argumentative analysis and understanding of 

narratives. The second Part, entitled “Argumentative Narratives in 

Context”, brings us six more chapters that concentrate on either 

particular functions played by argumentatively-oriented narratives 

or particular practices that may benefit from the use of special kinds 

of narratives.  

 

 

RAZINSKY, HILI (2017) Ambivalence: A philosophical exploration. 

London & New York: Rowman and Littlefield London: pp. 296. 

 

This book studies the relations between rationality and ambivalence 

(mental conflict). Ambivalence and its forms are central to 

subjectivity and communication, action and judgement. Defending a 

Davidsonian view about the constitutive rationality of mental 

attitudes, it argues that ambivalence is an important form of basic 

(constitutive) rationality and mental unity. Ambivalence can be 

irrational in a secondary sense, as in weakness of the will and self-

deception. It can also be highly rational, including forms of 

appropriate significant action with both opposed poles. Ambivalence 

of belief is possible, ordinary, basically rational and central to the 

logic of belief. The rationality of deliberation is also bound up with 

ambivalence. Rather than being the agnostic consideration of 



propositions or practical options, deliberation usually assumes and 

employs ambivalence, and may aptly end with it. 

 

 

GILBERT, MICHAEL A. (2014). Arguing with People. Peterborough, 

ON: Broadview Press.  Pp. 1-137. 

 

Arguing with People brings developments from the field of 

Argumentation Theory to bear on critical thinking in a clear and 

accessible way. This book expands the critical thinking and shows 

how those tools can be applied in the hurly-burly of everyday 

arguing. Gilbert emphasizes the importance of understanding real 

arguments, understanding just who you are arguing with, and 

knowing how to use that information for successful argumentation. 

Interesting examples and partner exercises are provided to 

demonstrate tangible ways in which the book’s lessons can be 

applied. Arguing with People is an excellent addition or add-on for 

any Critical Thinking course. “Addressed to students, it is clearly 

and engagingly written. … I recommend assigning this book as 

supplementary reading for a critical thinking course and also for an 

informal logic course.” — J. Anthony Blair, University of Windsor 

 

 WOHLRAPP, HARALD R.. (2014) The Concept of Argument. A 

Philosophical Foundation, Dordrecht: Springer (lxii+443 pages) 

 

The book is an attempt to revise and update our traditional 

understanding of argument. It is motivated by an awareness of some 

specificities which are not covered in the traditional theories—these 

are mainly two: the dynamics of argument and its subjective 

dimension. Their lack seems to be due to an underdeveloped 

understanding of the general “reflective” nature of argumentation. 

The present approach is based on a merger of pragmatist and 

dialectical philosophy. In the book the various aspects of the update 

are tackled in a sequence of 10 chapters, starting with “Knowledge” 

and ending at “Transsubjectivity”. 

 

 

 



Books reviewed since 2014 

Blair, J. A. (2012). Groundwork in the Theory of Argumentation: 

Selected Papers of J. Anthony Blair. Argumentation Library, Vol. 

21. Dordrecht: Springer. Pp. xxi, 1-355. 

Finocchiaro, Maurice A. (2013). “Meta-argumentation, An 

Approach to Logic and Argumentation Theory.” Studies in Logic, 

Logic and Argumentation, Vol. 42. London: College 

Publications. Pp. vii, 1-279. 

Macagno, Fabrizio and Douglas Walton. (2014). Emotive Language 

in Argumentation. New York: Cambridge. 

Rubinelli, Sara and A. Francisca Snoeck Henkemans (Eds.). (2012). 

“Argumentation and Health.” Special issue of the journal 

Argumentation in Context, Vol. 1, No. 1. Amsterdam: John 

Benjamins. Pp. vi, 1-142. 

Eemeren, Frans H. van and Bart Garssen (Eds.). (2015). Reflections 

on Theoretical Issues in Argumentation Theory. Cham: Springer 

International Publishing. Pp. xiv, 1-293. 

Amossy, Ruth. (2014). Apologie de la polémique. Paris: Presses 

universitaires de France. Coll. L’interogation philosophique. Pp. 

1-240. 

Gilbert, Michael A. (2014). Arguing With People. Peterborough, 

ON: Broadview Press. Pp. 1-12, front matter; 13-137. 

Campbell, John Angus, Antonio de Velasco and David Henry (Eds.). 

(2016). Rethinking Rhetorical Theory, Criticism, and Pedagogy: 

The Living Art of Michael C. Leff. East Lansing, MI: Michigan 

State University Press. Pp. xxiv, 1-481. 

Hitchcock, David. (2017). On Reasoning and Argument. Cham: 

Springer International Publishing. Pp. xxvii, 1-553. 

Tindale, Christopher W. (2015). The Philosophy of Argument and 

Audience Reception. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 

Pp. xii, 1-244.