<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p>In this paper, the author examines the burden of proof in the argu- mentative confrontations taking part in practices of political accountability. She does so by explaining how politicians maneuver strategically with the burden of proof in an attempt at winning the discussion in which they are involved. After making clear the role of the burden of proof in defining the difference of opinion in argumentative confrontations, the author outlines the constraints imposed by practices of political accountability on the burden of proof. Finally, she analyzes in detail a concrete case in which a politician maneuvers in such a way that his burden of proof is significantly diminished.</p></abstract>

In this paper, the author examines the burden of proof in the argu- mentative confrontations taking part in practices of political accountability. She does so by explaining how politicians maneuver strategically with the burden of proof in an attempt at winning the discussion in which they are involved. After making clear the role of the burden of proof in defining the difference of opinion in argumentative confrontations, the author outlines the constraints imposed by practices of political accountability on the burden of proof. Finally, she analyzes in detail a concrete case in which a politician maneuvers in such a way that his burden of proof is significantly diminished.

Maneuvering with the Burden of Proof: Confrontational Strategies in Dealing with Political Accountability

Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License, which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

In this paper, the author examines the burden of proof in the argu- mentative confrontations taking part in practices of political accountability. She does so...

Maneuvering with the Burden of Proof: Confrontational Strategies in Dealing with Political Accountability

Publié en ligne: 12 avr. 2014

Pages: 59 - 78

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/slgr-2014-0004

Mots clés
argumentative confrontation, burden of proof, dialectical route, material and procedural starting points, political accountability, strategic maneuvering

© Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License, which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Maneuvering with the Burden of Proof: Confrontational Strategies in Dealing with Political Accountability

Publié en ligne: 12 avr. 2014

Pages: 59 - 78

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/slgr-2014-0004

Mots clésargumentative confrontation, burden of proof, dialectical route, material and procedural starting points, political accountability, strategic maneuvering

© Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License, which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Mots clés
argumentative confrontation, burden of proof, dialectical route, material and procedural starting points, political accountability, strategic maneuvering