{"references": ["Bacon, Francis (1863). The Works of Francis Bacon. Edited by James Spedding, Robert Leslie Ellis and Douglas Denon Heath. Boston: Taggard and Thompson.", "Blackwell, Richard J. (1991). Galileo, Bellarmine, and the Bible. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.", "Boghossian, Paul (2006). Fear of Knowledge: Against Relativism and Constructivism. New York: Oxford University Press. doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199287185.001.0001", "Dascal, Marcelo (1995). \"Epistemolog\u00eda, controversias y pragm\u00e1tica\". Isegor\u00eda 12: pp. 8\u201343. doi: https://doi.org/10.3989/isegoria.1995.i12.239", "Dascal, Marcelo (1996\u00aa). \"Types of polemics and types of polemical moves\". In Dialogue Analysis IV (Proceedings of the 6th International Conference), vol. 1, edited by Sv\u011btla \u010cmejrkov\u00e1, Jana Hoffmanov\u00e1, Olga M\u00fcllerov\u00e1, and Jindra Sv\u011btl\u00e1. T\u00fcbingen: Max Niemeyer.", "Dascal, Marcelo (1996b). \"La balanza de la raz\u00f3n\". In La racionalidad: su poder y sus l\u00edmites, edited by Oscar Nudler. Buenos Aires: Paid\u00f3s.", "Dascal, Marcelo; Racionero, Quitin and Cardoso, Adelino (2006). Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz: The Art of Controversies. Dordrecht: Springer. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-5228-6", "Descartes, Rene (2006). Discourse on Method. New York: Macmillan.", "Engelhardt, Tristram H. and L. Caplan Arthur L. (ed.) (1987). Scientific Controversies. New York: Cambridge University Press. doi: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511628719", "Freudenthal, Gideon (1998). \"Controversy\". Science in Context 11 (2): pp. 155\u2013160. doi: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0269889700002969", "Hanson, Norwood Russell (1958). Patterns of Discovery: An Inquiry into the Conceptual Foundations of Science. New York: Cambridge University Press.", "Hempel, Carl G. (1965). Aspects of Scientific Explanation. New York: The Free Press. Kitcher, P. 1992. \"The naturalists return\". The Philosophical Review 101 (1): pp. 53\u2013114.", "Koyr\u00e9, Alexandre (1955). \"Influence of philosophic trends on the formulation of scientific theories\". The Scientific Monthly 80 (2): pp. 107\u2013111.", "Lakatos, Imre (1970). \"The methodology of scientific research programmes\". In Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge, edited by Imre Lakatos and Alan Musgrave (eds.). New York: Cambridge University Press. doi: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139171434.009", "Laudan, Larry (1979). Progress and its Problems. Berkeley: University of California Press.", "Machamer, Peter; Pera, Marcello and Baltas, Aristides (eds.) (2000). Scientific Controversies: Philosophical and Historical Perspectives. London: Oxford University Press.", "Nudler, Oscar (1990). \"On conflicts and metaphors: Towards an extended rationality\", in Conflict:Human Needs, edited by John Burton (ed.). New York: St. Martin's & MacMillan. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-21000-8_9", "Nudler, Oscar (2001). \"Is there progress in philosophy? A Russellian view\". Principia 5 (1\u20132): pp. 241\u2013252.", "Nudler, Oscar (2004). \"Hacia un modelo de cambio conceptual: espacios controversiales y refocalizaci\u00f3n\". Revista de Filosof\u00eda 29 (2): pp. 7\u201319.", "Pera, Marcello (1991). Scienza e Retorica. Roma/Bari: Laterza.", "Pinch, Trevor and Leuenberger, Christine (2006). \"Studying scientific controversies from the STS perspective\". EAST Conference Science, controversy and democracy, Aug. 3\u20136, 2006.", "Quine, Willard van Orman (1968). \"Epistemology naturalized\". In Ontological Relativity and other Essays. New York: Cambridge University Press.", "Rescher, Nicholas (1977). Dialectics. A Controversy Oriented Approach to the Theory of Knowledge. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.", "Rescher, Nicholas (1985). The Strife of Systems: An Essay on the Grounds and Implications of Philosophical Diversity. Pittsburgh: Pittsburgh University Press.", "Russell, Bertrand (1918). The Problems of Philosophy. London: Oxford University Press.", "Spranzi Zuber, Marta (1998). \"Dialectic, dialogue, and controversies: The case of Galileo\". Science in Context 2 (2): pp. 181\u2013203. doi: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0269889700002982", "Wittgenstein, Ludwig (1963). Philosophical Investigations (trans. G.E.M. Anscombe). Oxford: Blackwell."]}

The paper outlines the model of controversy spaces. The model of controversy spaces integrates two different elements of the dialectical tradition. On the one hand, dialectics in its ancient meaning: the practice of controversial dialogue. On the other hand, the model incorporates dialectics understood as a pattern of change in intellectual history, based on the confrontation between opposite standpoints. I will be argued in this paper, the dialectical tradition was almost completely left aside in modernity and substituted by a monolectic approach. The model that will be outlined below aims at overcoming this view by focusing on the emergence, development and transformation of controversy spaces.