Concept of Rivalry in D.H. Lawrence’s Sons and Lovers

Sons and Lovers (1913) is one of D.H. Lawrence’s most prominent novels in terms of psychological complexities characteristic of most, if not all, of his other novels. Many studies have been conducted on the Oedipus complex theory and psychological relationship between men and women in Lawrence’s novels reflecting the early twentieth century norms of life. This paper reexamines Sons and Lovers from the perspective of rivalry based on Alfred Adler’s psychological studies. The discussion tackles the sibling rivalry between the members of the Morels and extends to reexamining the rivalry between other characters. This concept is discussed in terms of two levels of relationships. First, between Paul and William as brothers on the one hand, and Paul and father and mother, on the other. Second, the rivalry triangle of Louisa, Miriam and Mrs. Morel. The qualitative pattern of the paper focuses on the textual analysis of the novel to show that Sons and Lovers can be approached through the concept of rivalry and sibling Rivalry. Keywords: Attachment theory, Competition, Concept of Rivalry, Favoritism, Sibling rivalry.

Argumentation theory: competition between modern research approaches

To overcome the crisis in the sphere of argumentation studies, the project proposes a logical-cognitive concept of argumentation which is a compound formalized theory that includes formalisms for modeling argumentation of different types, a relevant conceptual framework and a methodology for the use of scientific research in the practice. Three types of argumentation are defined: theoretical (two types) and practical. Theoretical argumentation is a critical discussion of the agents’ knowledge and opinions about facts aimed to substantiate a certain view or to change it – i.e. persuasion. Practical argumentation is a critical discussion of opinions about actions which includes, in addition to the statements about knowledge and opinions, statements of a non-descriptive nature about the agents’ values and intentions to adhere to a certain line of behavior. The study of argumentation needs to focus on the large structures that reflect specifics of the criticism and defense of the positions of the parties. An atom unit of such study is the argument as a statement of reason, while its molecular elements are the argumentative structure of a dispute (frame), a multitude of arguments that express the parties’ positions, a multitude of the agents’ knowledge and opinions that act as the bases for the formation of positions, lines of behavior, etc. Within the framework of this trend, both indefeasible (deductive) and defeasible argumentations can be studied. The argumentation effectiveness can be assessed based on the procedural semantics and using analogues of such logical notions as consistency and completeness. Modern approaches to the argumentation, including those claiming the compound status, can be classified using two methods: based on the substantive and practical criteria. Importance of the research outcomes amounts to the theoretical and methodological role of the new conception of argumentation and the general “umbrella” term argumentation that allows systematizing the manifold research and educational approaches and concepts in this field and is associated with communicative nature of modern social life where efficiency and social success rely on argumentative and narrative competences.

A beautiful mind meets free software: game theory, competition and cooperation DOI: 10.5585/exacta.v4iesp.680

.

A beautiful mind meets free software: game theory, competition and cooperation

.