Why is it that people are often inclined to accept irrational arguments or to reject rational
ones? It is the author argues because discussions in everyday life are both dialectical -
conducted with the best possible solution in mind - and rhetorical - organized by the
interactors in the form of a discursive event. By combining argumentation theoretical and
discourse analytical insights and revisiting ancient and medieval rhetoric and dialectics this
study transcends the assumption of a symmetrical communicative situation in which only good
arguments matter. It redefines dialectical concepts e.g. acceptability or conclusiveness
from a rhetorical and dialogic perspective and is thereby able to address colloquial speech
arguing as the inherently asymmetrical discursive event it is.
