A probabilistic analysis of argument cogency

Synthese 195 (4):1715-1740 (2018)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
This paper offers a probabilistic treatment of the conditions for argument cogency as endorsed in informal logic: acceptability, relevance, and sufficiency. Treating a natural language argument as a reason-claim-complex, our analysis identifies content features of defeasible argument on which the RSA conditions depend, namely: change in the commitment to the reason, the reason’s sensitivity and selectivity to the claim, one’s prior commitment to the claim, and the contextually determined thresholds of acceptability for reasons and for claims. Results contrast with, and may indeed serve to correct, the informal understanding and applications of the RSA criteria concerning their conceptual dependence, their function as update-thresholds, and their status as obligatory rather than permissive norms, but also show how these formal and informal normative approachs can in fact align.
PhilPapers/Archive ID
GODAPA-5
Revision history
Archival date: 2017-01-21
View upload history
References found in this work BETA
Argumentation Schemes.Walton, Douglas; Reed, Chris & Macagno, Fabrizio
Manifest Rationality.Johnson, Ralph
Argumentation Schemes.Walton, Douglas; Reed, Christopher & Macagno, Fabrizio

View all 41 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Added to PP index
2016-12-31

Total views
274 ( #11,454 of 40,749 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
100 ( #4,542 of 40,749 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks to external links.