How Should Errors in Normative Claims be Pointed Out?

The purpose of this paper is to answer the question: how should errors in normative claims be pointed out? Against this question, this paper demonstrates the ideal model of the person who points out the errors in normative claims. The first chapter analyzes “normative claims” themselves, based on the theory of “discourse ethics” proposed by Habermas. This chapter indicates that the validity of normative claims emerges only through a consensus in “discourse.” Next, the second chapter focuses on the “discourse” and analyzes this deeper structure. Based on this analysis, consequently, the model of the opponent who points out errors is demonstrated. The model is as follows: An opponent must, initially, admit the validity of a proponent’s claim, at least from the perspective of the “background discourse” through which the claim can be valid