Argumentation in philosophy and Brazilian jiujitsu: character, value and function of argumentation for philosophy

Abstract

In this work, starting from the classic pugilistic metaphor of argumentation, a parallel is drawn between the latter and Brazilian jiujitsu. First, it is discussed whether, in fact, the argument bears a resemblance and structure similar to a combat or boxing match. Afterwards, an attempt is made to explore the metaphor in the opposite direction, examining whether jiujitsu can be considered, in some way, also an argumentative practice. It is concluded, on the one hand, that, despite feminist criticism of the conflictive vision of argumentation, dialectics has always had, historically speaking, martial resonances. At the same time, although jiujitsu and argumentation are not the same, the former, like any other sport, also relates to the truth in a very special way.