The argumentative script attached to a question includes the set of positions, arguments, counter-arguments and refutations put forward by either party when this issue is debated. They are available to any arguer entering the arena and willing to take a position on the issue.
In the media sphere, when a new issue emerges, the arguments very quickly stabilize in an argument script.

The script corresponds to the state of the argumentative question. It may be implemented any number of times, on a wide variety of forums. It pre-exists and informs concrete argumentative discourses. It develops with the emergence of new issues and arguments.

The argument script can be represented as an argument map.[1]

1. Script and circumstances of the argument

Argument scripts are not the sole component of actual argument. A script essentially consists in a collection of arguments on the matter, on the merits of the case, regardless of the specific circumstances of particular encounters. A script may, however, also include generic characteristics of the speakers intervening in the debate and considerations on the conditions under which it takes place.
The argument “the finances of the country are in a state of crisis” is part of the script relating to refugees, as well as its standard refutation “you lack generosity / let us be generous”. An argument about the person, as “you wear jewels and dare to speak about the financial crisis!” is not part of the script, the interlocutor not necessarily wearing jewels.

2. Script and inventio

The existence of scripts largely modifies the classical concept of inventio, according to which arguments are produced  by the arguer, S. Rhetoric. When an argument concerns an everyday issue, the speaker may have to invent arguments, but when dealing with established socio-political issues, as well as in all disciplines where one can refer to a state of the question, arguments are merely selected from the relevant argument script, then reformulated. In such areas, arguments are not “invented”, they are available for all participant.
The first task of the interested party is to review the script relevant to the issue s/he wishes to discuss, and then to perform one’s score that is, to organize a discourse which updates and amplifies the argument line they have selected. In other words, the arguer must define and follow their path within the parameters of the script.
This conception of argumentative activity has repercussions for argumentation education, and emphasizes, firstly, the necessity of carefully established information prior to the discussion, and, secondly, the importance of individual expression and style in argumentation.

[1] A map of a fraction of the script corresponding to the question “Can computers think?” can be found at web.stanford.edu/~rhorn/a/topic/phil/artclISSAFigure1.pdf (29-09-2013).