{"id":5624,"date":"2021-10-24T18:50:17","date_gmt":"2021-10-24T16:50:17","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/icar.cnrs.fr\/dicoplantin\/?p=5624"},"modified":"2025-04-29T16:02:58","modified_gmt":"2025-04-29T14:02:58","slug":"strategy-e","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/icar.cnrs.fr\/dicoplantin\/strategy-e\/","title":{"rendered":"Strategy"},"content":{"rendered":"

Argumentative STRATEGY<\/span><\/h1>\n

A strategy is a complex set of coordinated actions, planned by an actor in order to achieve a specific goal.<\/span> Strategies can be either adversarial<\/em> or cooperative<\/em>.
\nAdversarial<\/em><\/strong> are developed in non-cooperative arenas, such as war, game of chess, or commercial competition. Such strategies are used to gain a decisive advantage over a competitor who is pursuing an antagonistic goal. Antagonistic strategies are covert, and are discovered by the adversary as they are implemented, see manipulation<\/a>. Cooperative strategies<\/em> are developed by partners working together to achieve a common goal, that benefits both. The strategic intent is transparent to all partners. For example, a research<\/em> strategy<\/em> is an action plan to solve a problem; teachers and students work together to implement a pedagogical strategy<\/em>.<\/p>\n

In the military field, the strategy<\/em> is developed before combat operations and tactics are developed during combat operations; tactics<\/em> refer to the local implementation of a global strategy.<\/p>\n

1. Argumentative Strategies<\/span><\/h1>\n

An argumentative strategy<\/em> is a set of speech choices planned and coordinated to support and enforce a claim before an audience.
\nArgumentative strategies are a subset of language and communication strategies, speech and text construction strategies, and interaction strategies.<\/p>\n

An argumentative strategy is adversarial<\/em><\/strong> when it is designed to help the speaker gain the upper hand over the opponent. What one loses, the other gains.<\/p>\n

There are two cases in which argumentative strategies can be cooperative<\/em><\/strong>:
\n\u2014 First, when the speakers have the same argumentative role<\/a>, share a common point of view and cooperate to support it.
\n\u2014 Second, they may have different roles, and without identifying with those roles, they may cooperate in constructing a common solution.<\/p>\n

The term argumentative tactics<\/em><\/strong> is not commonly used, but could be useful to refer to local<\/em> argumentative phenomena as part of the global<\/em> argumentative action. The decision to use such argumentation schemes can be seen as a tactical<\/em> move, an implementation of a general policy. However, this is not sufficient to define an argumentative strategy which requires the use of different kinds of instruments, at all levels of discourse, such as the coordination<\/strong> of word choice, argument choice and self-representation (as open\/closed to objections for example).
\nAn argument scheme can be identified on the basis of a short passage, while the study of a strategy requires an extended corpus that fully represents a position.<\/p>\n

2. Some argumentative strategies<\/span><\/h2>\n

The first strategic level is that of choosing the answer to the question, see stasis<\/em><\/a>.<\/p>\n

– A defensive strategy<\/em> <\/strong>merely aims at blocking the opponent’s discourse, especially by refuting<\/a> his arguments and\/or ruining<\/a> the discourse.<\/p>\n

– A counterproposal strategy<\/em><\/strong> ignores the opponent’s proposition P<\/strong> and argues a proposition Q <\/strong>that is incompatible with P<\/strong>. In such a context, argumentation may take an explanatory turn, see explanation<\/a>; rhetorical question.<\/a><\/p>\n

– Bentham has identified types of political parliamentary strategies (\u00a72)<\/a> which he calls fallacious, but which can be fallacious or fair.<\/p>\n

– Strategies of authority<\/span>
\n– Strategies instilling fear or hatred<\/span>
\n– Strategies of stalling<\/span>
\n– Strategies of confusion, an inexhaustible group.<\/span><\/p>\n

These strategies group together sets of arguments that basically aim to postpone debate<\/strong> in the hope that it will never take place. Overall, they might be called \u00ab\u00a0pre-emptive strategies<\/strong>\u00ab\u00a0:\u00a0 \u201cThe conditions are not yet right for you to join the European Union\u00a0\u00bb.<\/em><\/p>\n

– Conciliatory vs.<\/em> breakthrough<\/em><\/strong> strategies are characterized by the acceptance vs.<\/em> refusal of concessions, the flexibility vs.<\/em> radicalization of the proposals presented as compatible \/ incompatible. Conciliatory<\/em> strategies use information accepted by the audience, presenting the conclusions and their recommendations as a continuation, a logical consequence, of previous beliefs and actions. Disruptive<\/em> strategies defy the audience, rejecting all its representations in order to replace them with new ones. The first strategy is reformist<\/em>, the second is revolutionary<\/em>.<\/p>\n

3. Two Strategies of the Apostle Paul in Confronting the Athenians<\/span><\/h2>\n

These last two strategies are used successively by Paul,<\/span> the apostle of Christianity.
\nFirst, in the following passages, he addresses the Athenians for the first time. In order to meet this new audience\u00a0 (captatio benevolentiae<\/em>) he begins his speech with a reference to the their own\u00a0 culture and beliefs, see rhetoric<\/a>; beliefs of the audience<\/a>.
\nContinuity: <\/strong>Paul’s focus on his audience is evident in the underlined phrases.<\/p>\n

21 The one amusement the Athenians and the foreigners living there seem to have is to discuss and listen to the latest ideas. 22 So Paul stood before the whole council of the Areopagus and made this speech: \u201cMen of Athens, I have seen for myself how extremely scrupulous you are in all religious matters,<\/span>
\n<\/span>23 because, as I strolled around looking at your sacred monuments, I noticed among other things an altar inscribed: To an Unknown God<\/em>. In fact, the unknown God you revere is the one I proclaim to you.<\/span>
\n<\/span>Acts of the Apostles<\/em>, 17, 21-23[1]<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

Nevertheless, the message was met with skepticism by the Athenians. In particular, they questioned the resurrection of the dead.<\/p>\n

Later, under very different circumstances, Paul claims a break between his message and \u201cthe wisdom of the wise\u201d.
\nDisruption<\/strong>: the two underlined passages are a challenge to all classical Greek culture.<\/span><\/p>\n

17 For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel, not in cleverness of speech, so that the cross of Christ would not be made void. 18 For the word of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. 19 \u201cI will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and the cleverness of the clever I will set aside<\/span>.\u201d 20 Where is the wise man? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?<\/span> 21 For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not come to know God, God was well pleased through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe. 22 For indeed Jews ask for signs and Greeks search for wisdom; 23 but we preach Christ crucified, to Jews a stumbling block and to Gentiles foolishness.
\n<\/span>First Letter of St. Paul to the Corinthians<\/em>, 17-23.[2]<\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

3. \u201cStrategic Maneuvering\u201d<\/span><\/h1>\n

Pragma-dialectics has introduced the concept of strategic maneuvering<\/em> to reconcile dialectical and rhetorical demands<\/span>. The rhetorical demand is defined as a search for efficiency: each party wants its point of view to triumph as it is. The dialectical demand is the search for rationality. During an encounter, each party pursues these two goals simultaneously. In practice, the dialectical dimension is evaluated according to the pragma-dialectical rules<\/a> for the rational resolution of a disagreement. The rhetorical dimension is essentially communicative and presentational. In particular, it updates the classical requirement that the issue and position must be presented in the correct language or format for the target audience (van Eemeren, Houtlosser 2006).<\/p>\n

\n

[1]<\/a> Cited after www.catholic.org\/bible\/book.php?id=51&bible_chapter=17<\/a> (05-05-2017)<\/span><\/p>\n

[2]<\/a> Cited after www.biblescripture.net\/1Corinthians.html<\/a> (05-05-2017)<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Argumentative STRATEGY A strategy is a complex set of coordinated actions, planned by an actor in order to achieve a specific goal. Strategies can be either adversarial or cooperative. Adversarial are developed in non-cooperative arenas, such as war, game of chess, or commercial competition. Such strategies are used to gain a decisive advantage over a […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-5624","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-non-classe"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/icar.cnrs.fr\/dicoplantin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5624","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/icar.cnrs.fr\/dicoplantin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/icar.cnrs.fr\/dicoplantin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/icar.cnrs.fr\/dicoplantin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/icar.cnrs.fr\/dicoplantin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=5624"}],"version-history":[{"count":11,"href":"https:\/\/icar.cnrs.fr\/dicoplantin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5624\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":14130,"href":"https:\/\/icar.cnrs.fr\/dicoplantin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5624\/revisions\/14130"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/icar.cnrs.fr\/dicoplantin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5624"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/icar.cnrs.fr\/dicoplantin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5624"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/icar.cnrs.fr\/dicoplantin\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5624"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}