La dissonnance dans le dissensus : manifestations et conséquences argumentatives d’une attaque psychologisante
The objective of this paper is to describe the argumentative use of the expression "cognitive dissonance" on the social network Twitter. The descriptive approach which is developped here aims to report on the use of this lexeme in the context of controversial exchanges. The specificity of...
Enregistré dans:
| Auteur principal: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | article |
| Langue: | FR |
| Publié: |
University of Tel-Aviv
2021
|
| Sujets: | |
| Accès en ligne: | https://doaj.org/article/e5b5f2689adc45a5b4687ee5d2e1f8e5 |
| Tags: |
Ajouter un tag
Pas de tags, Soyez le premier à ajouter un tag!
|
| Résumé: | The objective of this paper is to describe the argumentative use of the expression "cognitive dissonance" on the social network Twitter. The descriptive approach which is developped here aims to report on the use of this lexeme in the context of controversial exchanges. The specificity of the expression "cognitive dissonance", contrary to other psychiatric attacks, lies in the fact that it is also a meta-argumentative criticism. Indeed, "cognitive dissonance" initially designates in cognitive sciences an incoherence between two elements perceived by the brain. The analyses carried out in this article, paying particular attention to counter-speech, show that this initial definition is reinvested during the argumentative use of "cognitive dissonance", which produces a double movement of refutation-disqualification. The argument by accusation of cognitive dissonance can therefore be assimilated to an ad hominem tu quoque. |
|---|