Abstract Health controversies are large, complex bodies of argumentative discourse. They involve committed oppositionality among people with heterogeneous interests and positions related to health, configurations of which may change over time, leaving traces in the form of argumentative texts that reflect not only pragmatic disagreements but also disagreements over epistemological questions. Understanding the complexity of health controversies requires significant investment of time and effort but also has significant disciplinary payoffs for argumentation. Because they are often sites for innovation in the practice of argumentation, health controversies hold promise for extending argumentation theory through discovery of novel phenomena. And because they are significant disagreement management challenges for society, health controversies invite the development within argumentation theory of an approach to intervention centered on valuing thorough exploration of disagreement.
Sally Jackson (Thu,) studied this question.