Correction to: Comment on ‘Constrained Maneuvering: Rhetoric as a Rational Enterprise’ (Argumentation, (2007), 20, 4, (467-471), 10.1007/s10503-007-9023-5)

Peter J. Schulz

doi:10.1007/s10503-019-09486-y

Correction to: Comment on ‘Constrained Maneuvering: Rhetoric as a Rational Enterprise’ (Argumentation, (2007), 20, 4, (467-471), 10.1007/s10503-007-9023-5)

Peter J. Schulz

Division of Communication & Media

Research output: Contribution to journal › Comment/debate

1 Scopus citations

Abstract

In the original publication of the article, the commentary of mine to Christopher Tindale’s article ‘Constrained Maneuvering: Rhetoric as a Rational Enterprise’ (Argumentation 2006, Vol 20, 4, pp. 447–466), English translations of phrasings regarding several distinctions in the concept of rationality were taken from Stefan Gosepath’s book Aufgeklärtes Eigeninteresse: Eine Theorie theoretischer und praktischer Rationalität, Frankfurt: Suhrkamp 1992, without providing reference to his publication.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	285
Number of pages	1
Journal	Argumentation
Volume	34
Issue number	2
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1007/s10503-019-09486-y
State	Published - 1 Jun 2020

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© 2019, Springer Nature B.V.

Access to Document

10.1007/s10503-019-09486-y

Cite this

@article{ce6d4ca806e74d129dfe2d86cf799d6d,

title = "Correction to: Comment on {\textquoteleft}Constrained Maneuvering: Rhetoric as a Rational Enterprise{\textquoteright} (Argumentation, (2007), 20, 4, (467-471), 10.1007/s10503-007-9023-5)",

abstract = "In the original publication of the article, the commentary of mine to Christopher Tindale{\textquoteright}s article {\textquoteleft}Constrained Maneuvering: Rhetoric as a Rational Enterprise{\textquoteright} (Argumentation 2006, Vol 20, 4, pp. 447–466), English translations of phrasings regarding several distinctions in the concept of rationality were taken from Stefan Gosepath{\textquoteright}s book Aufgekl{\"a}rtes Eigeninteresse: Eine Theorie theoretischer und praktischer Rationalit{\"a}t, Frankfurt: Suhrkamp 1992, without providing reference to his publication.",

author = "Schulz, \{Peter J.\}",

note = "Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2019, Springer Nature B.V.",

year = "2020",

month = jun,

day = "1",

doi = "10.1007/s10503-019-09486-y",

language = "English",

volume = "34",

pages = "285",

journal = "Argumentation",

issn = "0920-427X",

publisher = "Springer Netherlands",

number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Correction to

T2 - Comment on ‘Constrained Maneuvering: Rhetoric as a Rational Enterprise’ (Argumentation, (2007), 20, 4, (467-471), 10.1007/s10503-007-9023-5)

AU - Schulz, Peter J.

PY - 2020/6/1

Y1 - 2020/6/1

N2 - In the original publication of the article, the commentary of mine to Christopher Tindale’s article ‘Constrained Maneuvering: Rhetoric as a Rational Enterprise’ (Argumentation 2006, Vol 20, 4, pp. 447–466), English translations of phrasings regarding several distinctions in the concept of rationality were taken from Stefan Gosepath’s book Aufgeklärtes Eigeninteresse: Eine Theorie theoretischer und praktischer Rationalität, Frankfurt: Suhrkamp 1992, without providing reference to his publication.

AB - In the original publication of the article, the commentary of mine to Christopher Tindale’s article ‘Constrained Maneuvering: Rhetoric as a Rational Enterprise’ (Argumentation 2006, Vol 20, 4, pp. 447–466), English translations of phrasings regarding several distinctions in the concept of rationality were taken from Stefan Gosepath’s book Aufgeklärtes Eigeninteresse: Eine Theorie theoretischer und praktischer Rationalität, Frankfurt: Suhrkamp 1992, without providing reference to his publication.

UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85073986494

U2 - 10.1007/s10503-019-09486-y

DO - 10.1007/s10503-019-09486-y

M3 - Comment/debate

AN - SCOPUS:85073986494

SN - 0920-427X

VL - 34

SP - 285

JO - Argumentation

JF - Argumentation

IS - 2

ER -

Correction to: Comment on ‘Constrained Maneuvering: Rhetoric as a Rational Enterprise’ (Argumentation, (2007), 20, 4, (467-471), 10.1007/s10503-007-9023-5)

Abstract

Bibliographical note

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this