Common sense, argumentation and deep disagreements. Old disputes, new times

Abstract

The work deals with the concept of common sense in a brief historical overview with particular attention to Antonio Gramsci’s proposal. The use of this notion is exemplified in everyday life situations and the use formulated by the mass media. The appearance of hate speech is another incorporated theme that leads to expanding the study to social discourses and discursive hegemonies that occur in certain historical moments and concerning the validity of certain argumentative mechanisms. The breakdown of traditional logical sequences leads to the empire of enthymemes that only present conclusions. Common sense narratives are what allow the media right to impose on audiences outcomes with little or no evidence but that generate a high degree of verisimilitude. The emotionality added to the argumentative study allows us to notice that controversies and disputes are part of daily life and discursive exchanges. The perspective of initial agreement between the parties as the foundation of the idealist theory of argumentation is therefore questioned, which leads to take away the question of power, a factor that is always present in argumentative activity. Finally, the notion of deep disagreements that emerged in the last decades of the last century is reviewed and it is interesting to remember it to try to highlight issues that go beyond the theory of argumentation.