Argumentation in Theory and Practice: Gap or Equilibrium?

I address the problem of the relation between theory and practice, with a special view to the relation of argumentation theory to argumentative practice. It is common, in argumentation and in various professions, to diagnose a 'gap' between theory and practice, often followed by arguments that gaps are problematic and should be overcome. Closing the gap generally amounts to some sort of equilibrium view, where theory and practice are balanced, in line with each other. With some qualifications, I argue that a version of a gap is sound, as it leaves theory with a critical, independent role in relation to practice-which an equilibrium view does not.