Switch to: References

Citations of:

The Logic of Real Arguments

Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press (1988)

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Handbook of Argumentation Theory.Frans H. van Eemeren, Bart Garssen, Erik C. W. Krabbe, A. Francisca Snoeck Henkemans, Bart Verheij & Jean H. M. Wagemans - 2014 - Dordrecht, Netherland: Springer.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   33 citations  
  • Groundwork in the Theory of Argumentation: Selected Papers of J. Anthony Blair.John Anthony Blair - 2011 - Dordrecht, Netherland: Springer.
    J. Anthony Blair is a prominent international figure in argumentation studies. He is among the originators of informal logic, an author of textbooks on the informal logic approach to argument analysis and evaluation and on critical thinking, and a founder and editor of the journal Informal Logic. Blair is widely recognized among the leaders in the field for contributing formative ideas to the argumentation literature of the last few decades. This selection of key works provides insights into the history of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  • Reasons for reason-giving in unplanned discourse.Martha Sylvia Cheng - unknown
    Most studies of reason-giving have focussed on formal, planned situations rather than on how reason-giving functions in relatively unplanned discourse. This study looks at reason-giving by respondents to an anonymous telephone public-opinion survey, e xploring the relationship between fact, policy, and value claims and the types of reasons used to support those claims. The results resonate with two important areas in argumentation theory: argument fields and critical thinking. Further, I suggest that reason-giving can serve as a method for individuals to (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Making Sense of “Informal Logic”.Ralph H. Johnson - 2006 - Informal Logic 26 (3):231-258.
    This paper is an exercise in intellectual history, an attempt to understand how a specific term—”informal logic”— came to be interpreted in so many different ways. I trace the emergence and development of “informal logic” to help explain the many different meanings, how they emerged and how they are related. This paper is also, to some degree, an account of a movement that developed outside the mainstream of philosophy, whose origins lie in a desire to make logic useful (echoing Dewey).
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   13 citations  
  • Supposition, Conditionals and Unstated Premises.E. P. Brandon - 1992 - Informal Logic 14 (2).
    Informal logicians recognise the frequent use of unstated assumptions; some (e.g. Fisher) also recognise entertained arguments and recommend a suppositional approach (such as Mackie's) to conditional statements. It is here argued that these two be put together to make argument diagrams more accurate and subtle. Philosophical benefits also accrue: insights into Jackson's apparent violations of modus tollens and contraposition and McGee's counterexamples to the validity of modus ponens.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • The Port-Royal Logic's Theory of Argument.Maurice A. Finocchiaro - 1997 - Argumentation 11 (4):393-410.
    This is a critical examination of Antoine Arnauld's Logic or the Art of Thinking (1662), commonly known as the Port-Royal Logic. Rather than reading this work from the viewpoint of post-Fregean formal logic or the viewpoint of seventeenth-century intellectual history, I approach it with the aim of exploring its relationship to that contemporary field which may be labeled informal logic and/or argumentation theory. It turns out that the Port-Royal Logic is a precursor of this current field, or conversely, that this (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Reflections on Theoretical Issues in Argumentation Theory.Frans Hendrik van Eemeren & Bart Garssen (eds.) - 2015 - Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
    This volume presents a selection of papers reflecting key theoretical issues in argumentation theory. Its six sections are devoted to specific themes, including the analysis and evaluation of argumentation, argument schemes and the contextual embedding of argumentation. The section on general perspectives on argumentation discusses the trends of empiricalization, contextualization and formalization, offers descriptions of the analytical and evaluative tools of informal logic, and highlights selected principles that argumentation theorists do and do not agree upon. In turn, the section on (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • State-of-the-Art: The Structure of Argumentation. [REVIEW]A. Francisca Snoeck Henkemans - 2000 - Argumentation 14 (4):447-473.
    In this paper, a survey is presented of the main approaches to the structure of argumentation. The paper starts with a historical overview of the distinctions between various types of argument structure. Next, the main definitions given in the various approaches are discussed as well as the methods that are proposed to deal with doubtful cases.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   14 citations  
  • Language problem or language conflict? Narratives of immigrant women’s experiences in the US.Kendall A. King & Anna De Fina - 2011 - Discourse Studies 13 (2):163-188.
    This article investigates how Latin American women who migrate to the US frame their language experiences through narratives told in sociolinguistic interviews. As narratives reflect and shape social realities and relationships, narrative analysis can illuminate how individuals position themselves relative to language obstacles and ideologies, thus providing insights into processes that are central to the migration experiences of millions of individuals. We found that women related two types of stories: language conflict narratives, in which language was presented as part of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Are there methods of informal logic?Hans V. Hansen & Daniel H. Cohen - unknown
    This presentation seeks to understand informal logic as a set of methods for the logical evaluation of natural language arguments. Some of the methods identified are the fallacies method, deductivism, warrantism and argument schemes. A framework for comparing the adequacy of the methods is outlined consisting of the following categories: learner- and user-efficiency, subjective and objective reliability, and scope. Within this framework, it is also possible to compare informal and formal logic.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  • What a Real Argument Is.Ben Hamby - 2012 - Informal Logic 32 (3):313-326.
    : In “What is a ‘Real’ Argument?” Geoff Goddu (2009) suggests and rejects four candidates for what a real argument is, concluding that argumentation theorists should abandon the idea that there is a theoretically significant sub-class of arguments that should be called real. In this paper, I argue against Goddu’s conclusion, finding that real arguments are arguments that are used or that have prospective use in the practice of thinking about matters that call for reasonable and reflective judgment concerning what (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  • Argumentative Thinking: An Introduction to the Special Issue on Psychology and Argumentation.Lance J. Rips - 2009 - Informal Logic 29 (4):327-336.
    This special issue of Informal Logic brings together a num-ber of traditions from the psychology and philosophy of argument. Psycho-logists’ interest in argument typically arises in understanding how indivi-duals form and change their beliefs. Thus, theories of argument can serve as models of the structure of justi-fications for belief, as methods of diagnosing errors in beliefs, and as prototypes for learning. The articles in this issue illustrate all three of these connections.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Informal Logic and its Implications for Philosophy.Nicolas Maudet & Alec Fisher - 2000 - Informal Logic 20 (2).
    I take 'informal logic' to be the (descriptive and normative) study of 'real arguments'-arguments which are or have been used with the aim of convincing others of a point of view. I argue that the informal logic tradition thus conceived (i) lends strong support to something like Quine's view that our beliefs really support one another like the filaments in a spider's web--and thus that the traditional view that implication is an asymmetric relation is false; (ii) suggests that the classic (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • (1 other version)Argumentation Theory and the conception of epistemic justification.Lilian Bermejo-Luque - 2009 - In Marcin Koszowy (ed.), Informal logic and argumentation theory. Białystok: University of Białystok. pp. 285--303.
    I characterize the deductivist ideal of justification and, following to a great extent Toulmin’s work The Uses of Argument, I try to explain why this ideal is erroneous. Then I offer an alternative model of justification capable of making our claims to knowledge about substantial matters sound and reasonable. This model of justification will be based on a conception of justification as the result of good argumentation, and on a model of argumentation which is a pragmatic linguistic reconstruction of Toulmin’s (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Plausible deniability and evasion of burden of proof.Douglas Walton - 1996 - Argumentation 10 (1):47-58.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   16 citations  
  • Reasons for Reason-giving in a Public-Opinion Survey.Martha S. Cheng & Barbara Johnstone - 2002 - Argumentation 16 (4):401-420.
    This paper explores why respondents to a telephone public-opinion survey often give reasons for answering as they do, even though reason-giving is neither required nor encouraged and it is difficult to see the reasons as attempts to deal with disagreement. We find that respondents give reasons for the policy claims they make in their answers three times as frequently as they give reasons for value or factual claims, that their reasons tend to involve appeals to personal experience, and that they (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Topical Themes in Argumentation Theory: Twenty Exploratory Studies.Frans Hendrik van Eemeren & Bart Garssen (eds.) - 2012 - Dordrecht, Netherland: Springer.
    Topical Themes in Argumentation Theory brings together twenty exploratory studies on important subjects of research in contemporary argumentation theory. The essays are based on papers that were presented at the 7th Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation in Amsterdam in June 2010. They give an impression of the nature and the variety of the kind of research that has recently been carried out in the study of argumentation. The volume starts with three essays that provide stimulating (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Do we reason when we when we think we reason of think? [Spanish].David Miller - 2007 - Eidos: Revista de Filosofía de la Universidad Del Norte 7:88-108.
    Normal 0 21 false false false ES X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Tabla normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-fareast; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;} If the open society is a society that ‘sets free the critical powers of man’ (Popper, 1945, Introduction), then the subject of critical thinking, now widely taught in universities in North America and at the level of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • On thought experiments as a priori science.Richard Arthur - 1999 - International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 13 (3):215 – 229.
    Against Norton's claim that all thought experiments can be reduced to explicit arguments, I defend Brown's position that certain thought experiments yield a priori knowledge. They do this, I argue, not by allowing us to perceive “Platonic universals” (Brown), even though they may contain non-propositional components that are epistemically indispensable, but by helping to identify certain tacit presuppositions or “natural interpretations” (Feyerabend's term) that lead to a contradiction when the phenomenon is described in terms of them, and by suggesting a (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   28 citations  
  • On the processing of arguments.James F. Voss, Rebecca Fincher-Kiefer, Jennifer Wiley & Laurie Ney Silfies - 1993 - Argumentation 7 (2):165-181.
    This paper is concerned with the processing of informal arguments, that is, arguments involving “probable truth.” A model of informal argument processing is presented that is based upon Hample's (1977) expansion of Toulmin's (1958) model of argument structure. The model postulates that a claim activates an attitude, the two components forming a complex that in turn activates reasons. Furthermore, the model holds occurrence of the reason, or possibly the claim and the reason, activates values. Three experiments are described that provide (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • Informal Logic and Informal Consequence.Danilo Suster - 2011 - In Majda Trobok, Nenad Miščević & Berislav Žarnić (eds.), Between Logic and Reality: Modeling Inference, Action and Understanding. Dordrecht and New York: Springer. pp. 101--120.
    What is informal logic, is it ``logic" at all? Main contemporary approaches are briefly presented and critically commented. If the notion of consequence is at the heart of logic, does it make sense to speak about ``informal" consequence? A valid inference is truth preserving, if the premises are true, so is the conclusion. According to Prawitz two further conditions must also be satisfied in the case of classical logical consequence: (i) it is because of the logical form of the sentences (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • “Dialectics and the macrostructure of argument” by James Freeman.Alec Fisher - 1992 - Informal Logic 14 (2):193-204.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Persuasive Paradoxes in Cicero's Speeches.Manfred Kienpointner - 2003 - Argumentation 17 (1):47-63.
    The paper first presents a short survey of ancient and modern logical, rhetorical and argumentative approaches (e.g. Aristotle, Quintilian, Quine, Anscombre and Ducrot) studying the properties of paradoxical utterances. This survey is followed by a tentative definition of paradoxes as seemingly contradictory utterances triggering conversational implicatures in the sense of Grice. A specific group of paradoxes, namely, persuasive paradoxes, is further characterized by the specific implicatures which they trigger: the implicatures of persuasive paradoxes serve the interest of the (political) speaker (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • What is a “Real” Argument?G. C. Goddu - 2009 - Informal Logic 29 (1):1-14.
    Numerous informal logi- cians and argumentation theorists restrict their theorizing to what they call “real” arguments. But is there a clear distinction to be made between “real” and “non-real” arguments? Here I explore four possible accounts of the alleged distinction and argue that none can serve the theoretical uses to which the distinction is most often put. Résumé: Plusieurs logiciens construction formels et théoriciens de l’argument- ation limitent leur non de théories à ce qu’ils appellent des arguments « authentiques ». (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  • (1 other version)Mark Vorobej (2006): A Theory of Argument. [REVIEW]Jan Albert van Laar - 2009 - Argumentation 23 (2):285-290.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark