Switch to: References

Citations of:

Logic and contemporary rhetoric: the use of reason in everyday life

Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Thomson Learning. Edited by Nancy Cavender (2001)

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. The Distinction Between False Dilemma and False Disjunctive Syllogism.Taeda Tomic - 2021 - Informal Logic 41 (4):607-639.
    Since a clear account of the fallacy of false disjunctive syllogism is missing in the literature, the fallacy is defined and its three types are differentiated after some preliminaries. Section 4 further elaborates the differentia specifica for each of the three types by analyzing relevant argument criticism of each, as well as the related profiles of dialogue. After defining false disjunctive syllogisms, it becomes possible to distinguish between a false dilemma and a false disjunctive syllogism: section 5 analyzes their similarities (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • 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  
  • Informal Logic: A 'Canadian' Approach to Argument.Federico Puppo (ed.) - 2019 - Windsor, Canada: Windsor Studies in Argumentation.
    The informal logic movement began as an attempt to develop – and teach – an alternative logic which can account for the real life arguing that surrounds us in our daily lives – in newspapers and the popular media, political and social commentary, advertising, and interpersonal exchange. The movement was rooted in research and discussion in Canada and especially at the University of Windsor, and has become a branch of argumentation theory which intersects with related traditions and approaches (notably formal (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • Commentary on Johnson.Leo Groarke - unknown
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Argumentum ad Verecundiam: New Gender-based Criteria for Appeals to Authority.Michelle Ciurria & Khameiel Altamimi - 2014 - Argumentation 28 (4):437-452.
    In his influential work on critical argumentation, Douglas Walton explains how to judge whether an argumentum ad verecundiam is fallacious or legitimate. He provides six critical questions and a number of ancillary sub-questions to guide the identification of reasonable appeals to authority. While it is common for informal logicians to acknowledge the role of bias in sampling procedures and hypothesis confirmation , there is a conspicuous lack of discourse on the effect of identity prejudice on judgments of authority, even though (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • Feminist Perspectives on Argumentation.Catherine E. Hundleby - 2021 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
    Feminists note an association of arguing with aggression and masculinity and question the necessity of this connection. Arguing also seems to some to identify a central method of philosophical reasoning, and gendered assumptions and standards would pose problems for the discipline. Can feminine modes of reasoning provide an alternative or supplement? Can overarching epistemological standards account for the benefits of different approaches to arguing? These are some of the prospects for argumentation inside and outside of philosophy that feminists consider. -/- (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • Jumping to a Conclusion: Fallacies and Standards of Proof.Douglas Walton & Thomas F. Gordon - 2009 - Informal Logic 29 (2):215-243.
    Five errors that fit under the category of jumping to a conclusion are identified: (1) arguing from premises that are insufficient as evidence to prove a conclusion (2) fallacious argument from ignorance, (3) arguing to a wrong conclusion, (4) using defeasible reasoning without being open to exceptions, and (5) overlooking/suppressing evidence. It is shown that jumping to a conclusion is best seen not as a fallacy itself, but as a more general category of faulty argumentation pattern underlying these errors and (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • 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  
  • (1 other version)Bayesian Informal Logic and Fallacy.Kevin Korb - 2004 - Informal Logic 24 (1):41-70.
    Bayesian reasoning has been applied formally to statistical inference, machine learning and analysing scientific method. Here I apply it informally to more common forms of inference, namely natural language arguments. I analyse a variety of traditional fallacies, deductive, inductive and causal, and find more merit in them than is generally acknowledged. Bayesian principles provide a framework for understanding ordinary arguments which is well worth developing.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   24 citations  
  • Informal Logic: An Overview.J. Anthony Blair & Ralph H. Johnson - 2000 - Informal Logic 20 (2).
    In this overview article, we first explain what we take informal logic to be, discussing misconceptions and distinguishing our conception of it from competing ones; second, we briefly catalogue recent informal logic research, under 14 headings; third, we suggest four broad areas of problems and questions for future research; fourth, we describe current scholarly resources for informal logic; fifth, we discuss three implications of informal logic for philosophy in particular, and take note ofpractical consequences of a more general sort.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   19 citations  
  • Defining the Term "Argument".P. Chittleborough & M. E. Newman - 1993 - Informal Logic 15 (3).
    Informal logic has expanded the concept of an 'argument' beyond that presented traditionally by formal logicians-to include arguments as encountered in 'real-life'. Existent definitions of argument structure are argued to be inadequate by failing to fully recognise that, ultimately, arguments have a human source. Accordingly, a new definition is proposed which appeals to relevant cognitive and behavioural factors. The definition retains some traditional concepts, but introduces the term 'supportive' as a modification to 'premiss'. The concept of a 'persuader' is also (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Rhetorical Heuristics: Probabilistic Strategies in Complex Oratorical Arguments. [REVIEW]Gabor Tahin - 2011 - Argumentation 25 (1):1-21.
    The study describes a method created for the analysis of persuasive strategies, called rhetorical heuristics, which can be applied in speeches where the argument focuses primarily on questions of fact. First, the author explains how the concept emerged from the study of classical oratory. Then the theoretical background of rhetorical heuristics is outlined through briefly discussing relevant aspects of the psychology of decision-making. Finally, an exposition of how one could find these persuasive strategies introduces rhetorical heuristics in more detail.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Argumentative Injustice.Patrick Bondy - 2010 - Informal Logic 30 (3):263-278.
    The aim of this paper is to adapt Miranda Fricker’s concept of testimonial injustice to cases of what I call “argumentative injustice”: those cases where an arguer’s social identity brings listeners to place too much or little credibility in an argument. My recommendation is to adopt a stance of “metadistrust”—we ought to distrust our inclinations to trust or distrust members of stereotyped groups.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   34 citations  
  • Informal Logic.Leo Groarke - 1996 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
    Informal logic is an attempt to develop a logic that can assess and analyze the arguments that occur in natural language discourse. Discussions in the field may address instances of scientific, legal, and other technical forms of reasoning, but the overriding aim has been a comprehensive account of argument that can explain and evaluate the arguments found in discussion, debate and disagreement as they manifest themselves in daily life — in social and political commentary; in news reports and editorials in (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   40 citations  
  • The Logical and Philosophical Foundations for the Possibility of True Contradictions.Ben Martin - 2014 - Dissertation, University College London
    The view that contradictions cannot be true has been part of accepted philosophical theory since at least the time of Aristotle. In this regard, it is almost unique in the history of philosophy. Only in the last forty years has the view been systematically challenged with the advent of dialetheism. Since Graham Priest introduced dialetheism as a solution to certain self-referential paradoxes, the possibility of true contradictions has been a live issue in the philosophy of logic. Yet, despite the arguments (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Ocena argumentów w kontekście nauczania krytycznego myślenia.Krzysztof A. Wieczorek - 2018 - Studia Semiotyczne 32 (1):83-106.
    Jednym z najważniejszych celów kursów krytycznego myślenia powinno być dostarczenie słuchaczom narzędzi pomocnych w podejmowaniu trafnych decyzji w codziennym życiu. Podczas takich kursów wiele uwagi poświęca się zazwyczaj wyrabianiu u studentów umiejętności oceny argumentów. W niniejszym artykule próbuję odpowiedzieć na pytanie – jaka metoda oceny argumentów najlepiej nadaje się do zastosowania podczas kursów krytycznego myślenia? Jak sądzę, metoda taka powinna być możliwie najbardziej intuicyjna, „przyjazna użytkownikowi” – prosta zarówno do opanowania, jak i późniejszego stosowania. Są to warunki konieczne do tego, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Reasonable Responses: The Thought of Trudy Govier.Hundleby Catherine (ed.) - 2017 - Windsor: University of Windsor.
    This tribute to the breadth and influence of Trudy Govier’s philosophical work begins with her early scholarship in argumentation theory, paying special attention to its pedagogical expression. Most people first encounter Trudy Govier’s work and many people only encounter it through her textbooks, especially A Practical Study of Argument, published in many editions. In addition to the work on argumentation that has continued throughout her career, much of Govier’s later work addresses social philosophy and the problems of trust and response (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • 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  
  • Should critical thinking courses include the critique of religious beliefs?Donald Hatcher & Mark Battersby - unknown
    Over the last few years, there have been five best sellers critical of religion and religious belief. It seems that there is great interest in questions about religious belief. Ironically, critical thinking texts seldom examine the topic. This paper will evaluate eight arguments to exempt religious belief from rational critique. I conclude that the topic of religious belief should not be exempt from critical thinking classes.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Johnson`s The Rise of Informal Logic: Essays on Argumentation, Critical Thinking, Reasoning and Politics.David Hitchcock - 1996 - Informal Logic 18 (2):269-83.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Subordinating Truth – Is Acceptability Acceptable?George Boger - 2005 - Argumentation 19 (2):187-238.
    Argumentation logicians have recognized a specter of relativism to haunt their philosophy of argument. However, their attempts to dispel pernicious relativism by invoking notions of a universal audience or a community of model interlocutors have not been entirely successful. In fact, their various discussions of a universal audience invoke the context-eschewing formalism of Kant’s categorical imperative. Moreover, they embrace the Kantian method for resolving the antinomies that continually vacillates between opposing extremes – here between a transcendent universal audience and a (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   14 citations  
  • Govier's "Invention" of the Theory of Argument.Ralph H. Johnson - 2013 - Informal Logic 33 (2):98-115.
    In this paper, I propose that the inquiry known as a/the theory of argument is the “invention” of Trudy Govier, using that term in its rhetorical sense, viz., the process of choosing ideas appropriate to the subject. In her paper, “Is a Theory of Argument Possible?” Govier used the idea of theory of argument to focus her discussion on problems in argument analysis and evaluation that came to light in the 1970s and 1980s. The idea of a theory of argument (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Fallacies and Judgments of Reasonableness: Empirical Research Concerning the Pragma-Dialectical Discussion Rules.Frans Hendrik van Eemeren - 2009 - Dordrecht, Netherland: Springer.
    In Fallacies and Judgments of Reasonableness, Frans H. van Eemeren, Bart Garssen and Bert Meuffels report on their systematic empirical research of the conventional validity of the pragma-dialectical discussion rules. The experimental studies they carried out during more than ten years start from the pragma-dialectical theory of argumentation developed at the University of Amsterdam, their home university. In these studies they test methodically the intersubjective acceptability of the rules for critical discussion proposed in this theory by confronting ordinary arguers who (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   44 citations  
  • (1 other version)The Rise of Informal Logic: Essays on Argumentation, Critical Thinking, Reasoning, and Politics.Ralph Henry Johnson - 1996 - Newport, VA, USA: Vale Press. Edited by J. Anthony Blair, Trudy Govier, Leo Groarke, John Hoaglund & Christopher W. Tindale.
    We are pleased to release this edition of Ralph Johnson’s The Rise of Informal Logic as Volume 2 in the series Windsor Studies in Argumentation. This edition is a reprint of the previous Vale Press edition with some typographical errors and other minor mistakes corrected. The prime motive for gathering Ralph H. Johnson’s essays under one cover is their clear articulation of the goals, concerns and problems of the discipline of informal logic. To my knowledge all of the published articles, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   62 citations  
  • Evaluations of Rebuttal Analogy Users: Ethical and Competence Considerations.Bryan B. Whaley - 1998 - Argumentation 12 (3):351-365.
    Recent theorizing and research concerning the pragmatics of analogy in persuasion posits that it serves two communicative functions. Specifically, rebuttal analogy instrumentally functions as argument and also as a social attack device used to demean the competence or character of opponents. The study reported here empirically investigated message receivers' perceptions of rebuttal analogy users. Participants were exposed to one of four messages employing rebuttal analogy or to one of the same four messages with a nonanalogy version of the rebuttal argument. (...)
    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  
  • The Concept of Argument: A Philosophical Foundation.Harald R. Wohlrapp - 2014 - Dordrecht NL: Springer.
    Arguing that our attachment to Aristotelian modes of discourse makes a revision of their conceptual foundations long overdue, the author proposes the consideration of unacknowledged factors that play a central role in argument itself. These are in particular the subjective imprint and the dynamics of argumentation. Their inclusion in a four-dimensional framework and the focus on thesis validity allow for a more realistic view of our discourse practice. Exhaustive analyses of fascinating historical and contemporary arguments are provided. These range from (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   22 citations  
  • Some axioms underlying argumentation theory.George Boger - unknown
    This paper examines whether philosophers of argument, in spite of their disavowing ‘timeless principles’, nevertheless embrace a set of principles, or axioms, to underlie argumentation theory. First, it reviews the thinking of some prominent philosophers of argument; second, it extracts some principles common to their philosophies; and third, it draws out possible consequences for argumentation theory and asks whether such theory has an underlying political posture.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Why “Visual Arguments” aren’t Arguments.Ralph H. Johnson - unknown
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   31 citations  
  • Informal Logic’s Influence on Philosophy Instruction.J. Anthony Blair - 2006 - Informal Logic 26 (3):259-286.
    Informal logic began in the 1970s as a critique of then-current theoretical assumptions in the teaching of argument analysis and evaluation in philosophy departments in the U.S. and Canada. The last 35 years have seen significant developments in informal logic and critical thinking theory. The paper is a pilot study of the influence of these advances in theory on what is taught in courses on argument analysis and critical thinking in U.S. and Canadian philosophy departments. Its finding, provisional and much-qualified, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • Philosophy, Drama and Literature.Rick Benitez - 2010 - In Graham Robert Oppy, Nick Trakakis, Lynda Burns, Steven Gardner & Fiona Leigh (eds.), A companion to philosophy in Australia & New Zealand. Clayton, Victoria, Australia: Monash University Publishing. pp. 371-372.
    Philosophy and Literature is an internationally renowned refereed journal founded by Denis Dutton at the University of Canterbury, Christchurch. It is now published by the Johns Hopkins University Press. Since its inception in 1976, Philosophy and Literature has been concerned with the relation between literary and philosophical studies, publishing articles on the philosophical interpretation of literature as well as the literary treatment of philosophy. Philosophy and Literature has sometimes been regarded as iconoclastic, in the sense that it repudiates academic pretensions, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Critical Thinking Instruction.Donald Hatcher - 2015 - Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines 30 (3):4-19.
    Since the 80s, educators have supported instruction in critical thinking as “an Educational Ideal.” This should not be a surprise given some of the more common conceptions, e.g., Ennis’s “reasonable reflective thinking on what to believe or do,” or Siegel’s “being appropriately moved by reasons,” as opposed to bias, emotion or wishful thinking. Who would want a doctor, lawyer, or mechanic who could not skillfully evaluate arguments, causes, and cures? So, educators endorsed the dream that, through proper CT instruction, students’ (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Use and abuse revisited: Response to Pluhar and Varner. [REVIEW]Kathryn Paxton George - 1994 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 7 (1):41-76.
    In her recent Counter-Reply to my views, Evelyn Pluhar defends her use of literature on nutrition and restates her argument for moral vegetarianism. In his Vegan Ideal article, Gary Varner claims that the nutrition literature does not show sufficient differences among women, men, and children to warrant concern about discrimination. In this response I show how Professor Pluhar continues to draw fallacious inferences: she begs the question on equality, avoids the main issue in my ethical arguments, argues from irrelevancies, misquotes (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • Fallacy Forward: Situating fallacy theory.Catherine E. Hundleby - 2009 - Ossa Conference Archive.
    I will situate the fallacies approach to reasoning with the aim of making it more relevant to contemporary life and thus intellectually significant and valuable as a method for teaching reasoning. This entails a revision that will relegate some of the traditional fallacies to the realm of history and introduce more recently recognized problems in reasoning. Some newly recognized problems that demand attention are revealed by contemporary science studies, which reveal at least two tenacious problems in reasoning that I will (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  • Economic Reasoning and Fallacy of Composition: Pursuing a Woods-Walton Thesis.A. Finocchiaro Maurice - unknown
    Woods and Walton deserve credit for including a discussion of “economic reasoning” and its susceptibility to the “fallacy of composition.” Unfortunately, they did not sufficiently pursue the topic, and argumentation scholars have apparently ignored their pioneering effort. Yet, obviously, economic argumentation is extremely important, and economists constantly harp on this fallacy. This paper calls attention to this problem, elaborating my own approach, which is empirical, historical, and meta-argumentational.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Argumentation and learning.Baruch B. Schwarz - 2009 - In Nathalie Muller Mirza & Anne Nelly Perret-Clermont (eds.), Argumentation and education. New York: Springer. pp. 91--126.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • The Devil is in the Framework. Comment on Mizrahi vs. all Debate on the Strength of Arguments from an Expert Opinion.Szymon Makuła - 2022 - Philosophia 50 (4):1999-2013.
    In one of his papers, Moti Mizrahi argues that arguments from an expert opinion are weak arguments. His thesis may seem controversial due to the consensus on this topic in the field of informal logic. I argue that its controversy is framework-dependent, and if translated into a different framework, it appears to be a correct, however trivial, claim. I will use a framework based on Douglas Walton’s argumentation scheme theory and his conception of examination dialogue to demonstrate that it is (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • In Just What Sense Should I be Critical? An Exploration into the Notion of ‘Assumption’ and Some Implications for Assessment.Andrés Mejía D. - 2009 - Studies in Philosophy and Education 28 (4):351-367.
    The current dominant approach on the assessment of critical thinking takes as a starting point a conception of criticality that does not commit to any substantive view or context of meaning concerning what issues are relevant to be critical about in society or in life. Nevertheless, as a detailed examination of the identification of assumptions shows, when going from the theory of critical thinking to the praxis of producing and evaluating arguments, the critical person will inevitably make such commitments from (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Pragmatic Logic and the Study of Argumentation.Marcin Koszowy - 2010 - Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric 22 (35).
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations