Pragmatic Intelligence in Argumentation: Towards an Analytical Model

Abstract

       This research deals with pragmatic intelligence as used in the context of argumentation and the genre is a two-way kind of communication, say, a political debate. This area of study has not been given its due attention, especially from the pragmatic perspective. Accordingly, the current research aims at: providing a definition for pragmatic intelligence in the context of argumentation; tracing the strategies (logical, dialectical and rhetorical) that are employed to achieve pragmatic intelligence; examining the criteria that are fulfilled when such strategies are used throughout the process of argumentation; and developing an analytical model to analyze pragmatic intelligence in the genre of investigation. 

       Such an endeavor should have its impact and influence on enriching the literature with information about pragmatic intelligence and the way people pragmatically perceive and evaluate their own and others' intelligence. The research shed some light on fuzzy areas which must be delineated and made clear because they impinge upon understanding how pragmatic intelligence situations appeal themselves to the readers and listeners, and how in turn these readers could find out the impetus behind them. Among the conclusions is that arguers are considered pragmatically more intelligent when they utilize three kinds of intelligences according to this research: logical, dialectical and rhetorical as components of the process of pragmatic intelligence. These kinds of intelligences are considered happy (i.e. achieved the arguers' goal) when they meet certain criteria when the strategies (logical, dialectical and rhetorical) are used.