ABSTRACT
In Part I, I discussed the theory of argument as an inquiry and made the case that it was in need of improvement and that logic, specifically informal logic, could help. In Part II, I presented a theory of argument that derives from the informal logic tradition. I developed specific suggestions for the theory of analysis, where I argued for a revised conception of argument and understanding argumentation as manifest rationality. In chapters 7 and 8, I developed specific suggestions for the theory of appraisal. I argued for a specific theory of evaluation and also for a distinction between evaluation and criticism. I also presented some principles of criticism. Thus, Part II was in effect an argument that informal logic could provide the foundation for a viable theory of argument.
