Abstract
Deep disagreements are often thought to be unresolvable. In this paper, we discuss a specific case of apparent deep disagreement, namely the public debate on the polemic figure of Black Pete in the Netherlands, where a noticeable change in public opinion has occurred in recent years. We present the preliminary findings of a study on Twitter interactions on the topic, focusing in particular on how arguments spread outside ‘epistemic bubbles’ and ‘echo chambers’.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Title of host publication | Reason to Dissent |
| Subtitle of host publication | Proceedings of the 3rd European Conference on Argumentation, Volume II |
| Editors | Catarina Dutilh Novaes, Henrike Jansen, Jan Albert van Laar, Bart Verheij |
| Publisher | College Publications |
| Pages | 243-260 |
| Number of pages | 18 |
| Volume | 2 |
| ISBN (Electronic) | 9781848903326 |
| ISBN (Print) | 9781848903326 |
| Publication status | Published - Jun 2020 |
Publication series
| Name | Studies in Logics : Logic and Argumentation |
|---|---|
| Publisher | College Publications |
| Volume | 86 |
UN SDGs
This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
-
SDG 10 Reduced Inequalities
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Changing minds through argumentation: Black Pete as a case study'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver