"Münazara" and the internal dimension of argumentation ethics: A translation and commentary on Ahmed Cevdet's Adab-i Sedad in the light of sufism and western argumentation theories

Münazara is a contraction of Adab al-Bahs ve al-Münazara that could be translated as "Applied Ethics of Argumentation and Deliberation". It refers to an institutionalized discipline of disputation that started from al-Sarmaqandi's Risala fi Adab al-Bahs (mid. 13th century), comprehending juridical dialectics, philosophical dialectics and Sufi criticism of dialectics. After demonstrating the relation between Sufism and Münazara, I compare this eristic tradition with Western theories of argumentation, especially the New Dialectical School and the New Rhetorical School. I show that the main differences between these theories concern the understanding of "truth" and "ethics". Based upon Ahmed Cevdet Paşa's Adab-ı Sedad, I argue that argumentation discipline of Münazara does not only involve an external approach of ethics (i.e. etiquette) but also an internal one requiring from every discussant the control of their inner-self in order to implement a proper debate. I claim this internal dimension of argumentation ethics has not only a procedural role (conducting a proper debate) but also an epistemic one (defining what is not true).