This paper retraces and analyzes the debate around a major infrastructure project in central Stockholm, the construction of a third railroad track over the islet of Riddarholm. Using the analytical framework of the New Rhetoric (Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca 1958), it shows that the debate is not only a matter of diverging views about the necessity or the impact of the project but, as well, a matter of epistemology. Whereas both sides tend to refer to similar values and make use of matching rhetorical devices, they differ quite radically as to which knowledge they regard as valid and as to how they have organized their approach to the debate. Demonstration faces argumentation, the New Rhetoric suggests, as its contribution to our understanding of the genesis of urban projects
To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.