СПОРЫ О НЕВОЗМОЖНОМ: ПРАГМАТИЧЕСКИЕ ПРЕСУППОЗИЦИИ И ЦЕЛИ

Вестник Томского государственного университета. Философия. Социология. Политология. 2024. Т. 77. С. 17–31.

Mikirtumov I., Фролов К. Г.

The aim of the article is to explore a class of debates where subject is an impossible state of affairs or an impossible action. We argue that the choice of position in such a debate is based on agent’s pragmatic presupposition, which is a set of assumed causal relations within the fragment of the world accompanied by the idea of agency. The content of pragmatic presupposition and its relations with known pragmatic presuppositions of other parties determines for each participant a set of her indirect aims of the dispute. In the model we use, there are three stages of debates: a dispute about agenda, a discussion of the merits of the case, and a deliberation about the action. Within each of these stages, the parties may have a separate set of indirect aims. For the first stage of the debate, the most typical indirect aim of each of the parties is to declare themselves. For the second stage of the debate, the dominant indirect aim is to influence the audience and maintain one’s own authority in its eyes. Finally, for the third stage of the debate, the most typical indirect aim is to achieve any positive consequences even if there is obviously no possibility of realizing what is being discussed.

Keywords: теория аргументации, theory of argumentation, Deliberation, practical modality, делиберация, практическая модальность