المغالطات الحجاجية وخرق مبادئ التحاور في مناظرة العصربين أحمد ديدات وأنيس شروش Sporadic fallacies and breach of the principles of dialogue In the debate of the era between Ahmed Deedat and Anis Shroush | ||||
| سياقات اللغة والدراسات البينية | ||||
| Volume 2, Issue 1, April 2017, Page 25-48 PDF (1011.25 K) | ||||
| Document Type: المقالة الأصلية | ||||
| DOI: 10.21608/siaqat.2017.201404 | ||||
 View on SCiNiTO | ||||
| Author | ||||
| ربيعة برباق | ||||
| أستاذ محاضر _أ_، كلية الآداب واللغات، جامعة العربي التبسي، تبسة، الجزائر | ||||
| Abstract | ||||
| The debate between Ahmed Deedat and Dr. Anis Shroush is one of the most famous debates of the age, which consists of the total of the interventions of the two parties and the exchange of words between them, which follow a serial requirement of pilgrims, which is based on the duality of the prosecution and the objection, making one party use the fallacy when he finds himself unable to respond The arguments of his opponent, and this has resulted in a clear violation of many of the principles of communication and etiquette of dialogue, and make the debate closed before reaching a harmony between pilgrims | ||||
| Keywords | ||||
| الحجاج، المغالطة، التحاور، المناظرة pilgrims; fallacy; dialogue; debate | ||||
|
Statistics Article View: 189 PDF Download: 88 |
||||
