Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. The Argumentative Structure of Persuasive Definitions.Fabrizio Macagno & Douglas Walton - 2008 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 11 (5):525-549.
    In this paper we present an analysis of persuasive definition based on argumentation schemes. Using the medieval notion of differentia and the traditional approach to topics, we explain the persuasiveness of emotive terms in persuasive definitions by applying the argumentation schemes for argument from classification and argument from values. Persuasive definitions, we hold, are persuasive because their goal is to modify the emotive meaning denotation of a persuasive term in a way that contains an implicit argument from values. However, our (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   14 citations  
  • The Bricot–Mair Dispute: Scholastic Prolegomena to Non-Compositional Semantics.Miroslav Hanke - 2014 - History and Philosophy of Logic 35 (2):148-166.
    From a general semantic point of view, Thomas Bricot and John Mair are proponents of the solution to semantic paradoxes based on appreciation of the contextuality of truth, who differ in their approach to the relations of logical consequence and contradiction. The core of the study is the analysis of Mair's criticism of Bricot presented in the sixth quaestio of his Tractatus insolubilium where the consequences of non-compositional semantics for the concepts of synonymy and logical form are addressed. The polemic (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Persuasive Definitions: Values, Meanings and Implicit Disagreements.Fabrizio Macagno & Douglas Walton - 2008 - Informal Logic 28 (3):203-228.
    The purpose of this paper is to inquire into the relationship between persuasive definition and common knowledge (propositions generally accepted and not subject to dispute in a discussion). We interpret the gap between common knowledge and persuasive definition (PD) in terms of potential disagreements: PDs are conceived as implicit arguments to win a potential conflict. Persuasive definitions are analyzed as arguments instantiating two argumentation schemes, argument from classification and argument from values, and presupposing a potential disagreement. The argumentative structure of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  • Making it Public: Testimony and Socially Sanctioned Common Grounds.Paula Olmos - 2007 - Informal Logic 27 (2):211-227.
    Contrary to current individualistic epistemology, Classical rhetoric provides us with a pragmatical and particularly dynamic conception of ‘testimony’ as a source made available for the orator by the particular community in which she acts. In order to count as usable testimony, a testimony to which one could appeal in further communications, any discourse must comply with specific rules of social sanction. A deliberate attention to the social practices in which testimony is given and assessed may offer us a more accurate (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  • Reasoning from Classifications and Definitions.Douglas Walton & Fabrizio Macagno - 2009 - Argumentation 23 (1):81-107.
    In this paper we analyze the uses and misuses of argumentation schemes from verbal classification, and show how argument from definition supports argumentation based on argument from verbal classification. The inquiry has inevitably included the broader study of the concept of definition. The paper presents the schemes for argument from classification and for argument from definition, and shows how the latter type of argument so typically supports the former. The problem of analyzing arguments based on classification is framed in a (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   14 citations  
  • The Origins of Species Concepts.John Simpson Wilkins - 2003 - Dissertation, University of Melbourne
    The longstanding species problem in biology has a history that suggests a solution, and that history is not the received history found in many texts written by biologists or philosophers. The notion of species as the division into subordinate groups of any generic predicate was the staple of logic from Aristotle through the middle ages until quite recently. However, the biological species concept during the same period was at first subtly and then overtly different. Unlike the logic sense, which relied (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • A means-end classification of argumentation schemes.Fabrizio Macagno - 2015 - In Frans Hendrik van Eemeren & Bart Garssen (eds.), Reflections on Theoretical Issues in Argumentation Theory. Cham, Switzerland: Springer. pp. 183-201.
    One of the crucial problems of argumentation schemes as illustrated in (Walton, Reed & Macagno 2008) is their practical use for the purpose of analyzing texts and producing arguments. The high number and the lack of a classification criterion make this instrument extremely difficult to apply practically. The purpose of this paper is to analyze the structure of argumentation schemes and outline a possible criterion of classification based on alternative and mutually-exclusive possibilities. Such a criterion is based not on what (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   12 citations  
  • Classification and Ambiguity: the Role of Definition in a Conceptual System.Douglas Walton & Fabrizio Macagno - 2009 - Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric 16 (29).
    With the advent of the semantic web, the problem of ambiguity is becoming more and more urging. Semantic analysis is necessary for explaining and resolving some sorts of ambiguity by inquiring into the relation between possibilities of predication and definition of a concept in order to solve problems such as interpretation and ambiguity. If computing is now approaching such problems of linguistic analysis, what is worth inquiring into is how the development of linguistic studies can be useful for developing the (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Comparing the Argumentum Model of Topics to Other Contemporary Approaches to Argument Schemes: The Procedural and Material Components.Eddo Rigotti & Sara Greco Morasso - 2010 - Argumentation 24 (4):489-512.
    This paper focuses on the inferential configuration of arguments, generally referred to as argument scheme. After outlining our approach, denominated Argumentum Model of Topics (AMT, see Rigotti and Greco Morasso 2006, 2009; Rigotti 2006, 2008, 2009), we compare it to other modern and contemporary approaches, to eventually illustrate some advantages offered by it. In spite of the evident connection with the tradition of topics, emerging also from AMT’s denomination, its involvement in the contemporary dialogue on argument schemes should not be (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   39 citations  
  • Traditional Logic, Modern Logic and Natural Language.Wilfrid Hodges - 2009 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 38 (6):589-606.
    In a recent paper Johan van Benthem reviews earlier work done by himself and colleagues on ‘natural logic’. His paper makes a number of challenging comments on the relationships between traditional logic, modern logic and natural logic. I respond to his challenge, by drawing what I think are the most significant lines dividing traditional logic from modern. The leading difference is in the way logic is expected to be used for checking arguments. For traditionals the checking is local, i.e. separately (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 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  
  • Medieval theories of consequence.Catarina Dutilh Novaes - 2012 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy:1-21.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  • 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  
  • Situated practices of testimony. A rhetorical approach.Paula Olmos - 2008 - Theoria 23 (1):57-68.
    Contrary to most current epistemologists who concentrate on core cases of rather ‘spontaneous’ trust and belief in the face of assertions, Classical rhetoricians addressed the study of ‘testimony’ as an two-acts phenomenon: that of the ‘disclosure’ of information and that of the ‘appeal’ to its authority in subsequent discursive practices. Moreover, they primarily focused on this second phase as they assumed that it was such argumentative setting that finally gave ‘testimonial’ relevance to the first act. According to this ‘rhetorical’ model, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • Bernard of Clairvaux.Constant J. Mews - 2011 - In H. Lagerlund (ed.), Encyclopedia of Medieval Philosophy. Springer. pp. 159--163.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • The compossibility of impossibilities and ars obligatoria.Mirko Yrjönsuuri - 1998 - History and Philosophy of Logic 19 (4):235-248.
    In this paper I present a new approach to the so called ars obligatoria of the thirteenth and early fourteenth century. In standard medieval disputations an opponent attacks a thesis defended by the respondent. Some thirteenth-century authors distinguish two duties that the respondent has. First, he must grant whatever seems to be true. Second, he must grant whatever follows from what he has already granted. When the first duty is overridden by the specific duty to defend a false thesis (which (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • The Reception of Boethian Topics in the Early Middle Ages.Fiorella Magnano - 2021 - Patristica Et Medievalia 42 (2).
    The purpose of this study is to focus on the coexistence, during the transmission of the doctrine on the Topics in the early Middle Ages, of two different interpretations: although both emerge from two commentaries on Cicero’s Topics, however, they gave rise to two different readings: the one transmitted by Marius Victorinus who thought the topics almost exclusively in the service of Rhetoric, the other conceived by Boethius who intended to restore the centrality that the Topics had in the Aristotelian (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Simon of Faversham.Ana Maria Mora-Marquez - 2018 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Logic and Rhetoric in Legal Argumentation: Some Medieval Perspectives.Hanns Hohmann - 1998 - Argumentation 12 (1):39-55.
    While the formal treatment of arguments in the late medieval modi arguendi owes much to dialectic, this does not remove the substance and function of the argumentative modes discussed from the realm of rhetoric. These works, designed to teach law students skills in legal argumentation, remain importantly focused on persuasive features of argumentation which have traditionally been strongly associated with a rhetorical approach, particularly in efforts to differentiate from it dialectic as a more strictly scientific and logical form of reasoning. (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 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  
  • Aristotle's Topics and informal reasoning.Joseph Novak - unknown
    The modern tradition of informal logic has relied heavily on accepting, modifying, or criticizing the patterns of reasoning mentioned in Aristotle's Sophistical Refutations. However, already in 1971, Stachowiak focussed his attention on the muc h neglected Topics and enumerated in his work, Rationalismus im Ursprung some of the Aristotelian rules governing the formation of definitions and principles for correct reasoning. The paper will try to examine how these principles might ap ply to informal arguments today.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Saadia Gaon.Jonathan Jacobs - 2011 - In H. Lagerlund (ed.), Encyclopedia of Medieval Philosophy. Springer. pp. 1171--1173.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • On the Art of Finding Arguments: What Ancient and Modern Masters of Invention Have to Tell Us About the "Ars Inveniendi".Manfred Kienpointner - 1997 - Argumentation 11 (2):225-236.
    This paper deals with what has been called "ars inveniendi" (’art of finding‘) in antiquity, medieval and early modern times. A survey of different techniques of finding tenable and relevant arguments is presented (among them, the Topical tradition, Status theory, Debate theory, Encyclopedic systems, Creativity techniques). Their advantages and disadvantages are critically compared. It is suggested that a mixture of strategies of finding arguments should be used. Finally, a few remarks showing the relationship beween the strategies of finding arguments and (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   24 citations  
  • The Greek Roots of the Ad Hominem-Argument.Graciela Marta Chichi - 2002 - Argumentation 16 (3):333-348.
    In this paper, I discuss the current thesis on the modern origin of the ad hominem-argument, by analysing the Aristotelian conception of it. In view of the recent accounts which consider it a relative argument, i.e., acceptable only by the particular respondent, I maintain that there are two Aristotelian versions of the ad hominem, that have identifiable characteristics, and both correspond to the standard variants distinguished in the contemporary treatments of the famous informal fallacy: the abusive and the circumstancial or (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • The Value of Topoi.J. P. Zompetti - 2006 - Argumentation 20 (1):15-28.
    Despite Vancil’s (1979) proclamation over twenty years ago that topoi have been abandoned in argument theory, this essay contends that topoi should have a vital role in contemporary argumentation theory. Four key areas are identified where topoi are (or can be) essential tools for argumentation: Locating argument, building argument, development of critical thinking, and argument pedagogy. As a result, teachers and students of argument can both benefit from a (re)discovery of topoi.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • Aristotle on Universal Quantification: A Study from the Point of View of Game Semantics.M. Marion & H. Rückert - 2016 - History and Philosophy of Logic 37 (3):201-229.
    In this paper we provide an interpretation of Aristotle's rule for the universal quantifier in Topics Θ 157a34–37 and 160b1–6 in terms of Paul Lorenzen's dialogical logic. This is meant as a contribution to the rehabilitation of the role of dialectic within the Organon. After a review of earlier views of Aristotle on quantification, we argue that this rule is related to the dictum de omni in Prior Analytics A 24b28–29. This would be an indication of the dictum’s origin in (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  • The topics in medieval logic.Niels Green-Pedersen - 1987 - Argumentation 1 (4):407-417.
    The topics is a theory of argumentation based upon topoi or in Latin loci. The medieval logicians used works by Aristotle and Boethius as their sources for this doctrine, but they developed it in a rather original way. The topics became a higher-level analysis of arguments which are non-valid from a purely formal point of view, but where it is none the less legitimate to infer the conclusion from the premiss. In this connection the topics give rise to a number (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • The Common Topic in Aristotle’s Rhetoric: Precursor of the Argumentation Scheme.Antoine C. Braet - 2005 - Argumentation 19 (1):65-83.
    In the present article I attribute to the common topic in the Rhetoric a two-fold suggestive function and a guarantee function. These three functions are possible because this type of topic, while often quite abstract, nevertheless contains thought-steering, substantial terms, and formulates a generally empirical or normative endoxon. Assuming that according to Aristotle an enthymeme has at least two premises, it would appear that a common topic is the abstract principle behind the often implicit major premise. This means that the (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   10 citations  
  • (1 other version)The Ancient Argumentative Game: τóπoι and loci in Action. [REVIEW]Sara Rubinelli - 2006 - Argumentation 20 (3):253-272.
    In classical logic and rhetoric the strategies of argumentation known as topoi played a crucial role. Yet, topoi refer there to different kinds of strategies that this study intends to explain synoptically. Main focus will be on passages from Aristotle and Cicero. Indeed, these sources contain examples and theoretical considerations, which provide the basis for a general investigation of the complex phenomenon of topoi in the ancient world. Four main types of topoi will be juxtaposed and discusses comparatively as a (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  • Logical, Semantic and Cultural Paradoxes.Anna Orlandini - 2003 - Argumentation 17 (1):65-86.
    The property common to three kinds of paradoxes (logical, semantic, and cultural) is the underlying presence of an exclusive disjunction: even when it is put to a check by the paradox, it is still invoked at the level of implicit discourse. Hence the argumentative strength of paradoxical propositions is derived. Logical paradoxes (insolubilia) always involve two contradictory, mutually exclusive, truths. One truth is always perceived to the detriment of the other, in accordance with a succession which is endlessly repetitive. A (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Eddo Rigotti and Sara Greco: Inference in Argumentation. A Topics-Based Approach to Argument Schemes: 2019, Springer, Cham.Christophe Geudens - 2020 - Argumentation 34 (3):399-402.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Aristotle'stopics and medieval obligational disputations.Mikko Yrjönsuuri - 1993 - Synthese 96 (1):59 - 82.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  • John Buridan on the Possibility of Defining Definition.Rodrigo Guerizoli - 2017 - History and Philosophy of Logic 38 (3):201-209.
    The study of the medieval reception of Aristotle’s Topics has largely been oriented toward debates on dialectical argumentation. And this is surely right. Nonetheless, I wish to approach John Buridan’s commentary on the Topics from another perspective, which highlights some semantic features of the set of predicates around which the work is organized. Thus, in my paper I will first reconstruct Buridan’s account of the identification of the predicates discussed in the Topics. I will argue that, for him, they are (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • (1 other version)Abélard et les grammairiens: Sur le verbe substantif et la prédication.Irene Rosier-Catach - 2003 - Vivarium 41 (2):175-248.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations