| dc.description.abstract | In its most distinguished (Plato, Aristotle, Cicero) representatives’ intentions the art of reasoning was to be a
guide to the world of values. It was to favour the choice of values by means of advice or discouragement, accusing
or upholding judgement, praises or reprimands (positive or negative estimation). In classical theory of rhetoric
the terms ‘argumentation’ and ‘argument’ refer to showing a process of thinking leading to a motivation
(acceptance) or a refutation (denial) of an assumption, an objection, a someone else’s opinion expressed in an
utterance. Consequently, both ‘argumentation’ and ‘arguments’ should be adjusted not only to a subject of a
rhetorical discourse but also to the receivers’ cognitive powers and their assertive skills, i.e. to experiencing
arguments with conviction. Argumentation assumes that both the speaker and the hearers want to start and maintain a
mental contact, the speaker’s wish to convince and the hearers’ desire to listen to. As a result a rhetorical
argumentation differs fundamentally from the logical one that does not take into account the audience’s reactions
at all. The need of functional and purposeful but also fine convincing belongs not only to didactics, it is
generally one of the most important components of humanistic values. | en |
