Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Being a Correct Presumption vs. Being Presumably the Case.Lilian Bermejo-Luque - 2016 - Informal Logic 36 (1):1-25.
    I argue for the distinction between presuming that p and maintaining that presumably p. In order to make sense of this distinction, I defend a non-inferentialist conception of presumptions and offer an account of the correctness conditions for both presumptions and presumptive inferences. I characterize presumptions as a type of constative speech-act having certain semantic correctness conditions. In turn, regarding presumptive inferences, my strategy is to provide the correctness conditions for the use of an epistemic modal such as “presumably.” This (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   16 citations  
  • File of Fallacies: Alfred Sidgwick: A Little-Known Precursor of Informal Logic and Argumentation. [REVIEW]Douglas Walton - 2000 - Argumentation 14 (2):175-179.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Coping with ambiguity and uncertainty in patient-physician relationships: II.Traditio argumentum respectus. [REVIEW]Charles B. Rodning - 1992 - Journal of Medical Humanities 13 (3):147-156.
    A methodology of argumentation and a perspective of incredulity are essential ingredients of all intellectual endeavor, including that associated with the art and science of medical care.Traditio argumentum respectus (tradition of respectful argumentation) as a principled system of assessing the validity of beliefs, opinions, perceptions, data, and knowledge, is worthy of practice and perpetuation, because assessments of validity are susceptible to incompleteness, incorrectness, and misinterpretation. Since the latter may lead to ambiguity, uncertainty, anxiety, and animosity among the individuals (patients and (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Secundum Quid and the Pragmatics of Arguments. The Challenges of the Dialectical Tradition.Fabrizio Macagno - 2022 - Argumentation 36 (3):317-343.
    The phrase _secundum quid et simpliciter_ is the Latin expression translating and labelling the sophism described by Aristotle as connected with the use of some particular expression “absolutely or in a certain respect and not in its proper sense.” This paper presents an overview of the analysis of this fallacy in the history of dialectics, reconstructing the different explanations provided in the Aristotelian texts, the Latin and medieval dialectical tradition, and the modern logical approaches. The _secundum quid_ emerges as a (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Wigmore's Chart Method.Jean Goodwin & Alec Fisher - 2000 - Informal Logic 20 (3).
    A generation before Beardsley, legal scholar John Henry Wigmore invented a scheme for representing arguments in a tree diagram, aimed to help advocates analyze the proof of facts at trial. In this essay, I describe Wigmore's "Chart Method" and trace its origin and influence. Wigmore, I argue, contributes to contemporary theory in two ways. His rhetorical approach to diagramming provides a novel perspective on problems about the theory of reasoning, premise adequacy, and dialectical obligations. Further, he advances a novel solution (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • The epistemic relevance of social considerations in ordinary day-to-day presumptions.Fred J. Kauffeld - unknown
    The involvement of social considerations in our ordinary conception of presumption and corresponding plain practice of presuming things raises doubts as to whether they afford epistemically satisfying bases for rational argumentation. To some this involvement illuminates important modes of discursive inquiry; to others it points to the need for theoretically based reform or regulation of our ordinary practices. This paper attempts to clarify and defend the epistemic value of ordinary presumptions.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Fallacies and the preconditions of argumentation.Chris Campolo - unknown
    If we think of fallacies as violations of the preconditions governing the products, processes, and procedures of argumentation, we see that fallacies do not merely weaken arguments, but rather undermine the possibility of argument itself. This approac h recommends itself on several counts. First, it accounts for diversity in fallacy analysis. Second, it makes possible investigations into new kinds of fallacies. Third, it provides new applications for ongoing developments in fallacy theory.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark