Switch to: Citations

References in:

The Logical Evaluation of Arguments

Argumentation 30 (2):167-180 (2016)

Add references

You must login to add references.
  1. Exchanging Reasons: responses to critics.Lilian Bermejo-Luque - 2011 - Theoria 26 (3):329-343.
    I provide responses to what I take to be the most salient aspects of John Biro, James Freeman, David Hitchcock, Robert Pinto, Harvey Siegel and Luis Vega’s criticisms to the normative model for argumentation that I have developed in Giving Reasons. Each response is articulated on a main question, i.e., the distinction between regulative and constitutive normativity within Argumentation Theory’s models, the semantic appraisal of argumentation, the concept of justification, the differences between Toulmin’s model and my model of argument and (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • The Uses of Argument.Stephen E. Toulmin - 1958 - Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
    A central theme throughout the impressive series of philosophical books and articles Stephen Toulmin has published since 1948 is the way in which assertions and opinions concerning all sorts of topics, brought up in everyday life or in academic research, can be rationally justified. Is there one universal system of norms, by which all sorts of arguments in all sorts of fields must be judged, or must each sort of argument be judged according to its own norms? In The Uses (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   253 citations  
  • The Virtuous Tortoise.David Botting - 2016 - Philosophical Investigations 39 (4).
    There is no philosophically interesting distinction to be made between inference-rules and premises. That there is such a distinction is often held to follow from the possibility of infinite regress illustrated by Carroll's story of Achilles and the tortoise. I will argue that this is wrong on three separate grounds. Consequently, Carroll's fable provides no motivation to abandon the traditional logical separation of arguments into their premises and conclusions. There is no proposition that must be taken to be a rule (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • The Virtuous Tortoise.David Botting - 2015 - Philosophical Investigations 40 (1):31-39.
    There is no philosophically interesting distinction to be made between inference-rules and premises. That there is such a distinction is often held to follow from the possibility of infinite regress illustrated by Carroll's story of Achilles and the tortoise. I will argue that this is wrong on three separate grounds. Consequently, Carroll's fable provides no motivation to abandon the traditional logical separation of arguments into their premises and conclusions. There is no proposition that must be taken to be a rule (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • The Question of Truth.David Botting - 2010 - Informal Logic 30 (4):413-434.
    The problem with the pragma-dialectical view, it has been argued, is that it takes argumentation as aiming at consensus rather than truth or justified belief. The pragma-dialecticians often imply that an argumentative process aiming at consensus in a way constrained by the “Ten Commandments” will in the long run converge on epistemically favourable standpoints. I will argue that they are right provided (i) pragma-dialectics is construed, as they say, as a theory of criticism; (ii) pragma-dialectics and the other theories of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • Problems in Argument Analysis and Evaluation.Trudy Govier - 2018 - Windsor: University of Windsor.
    We are pleased to publish this WSIA edition of Trudy’s Govier’s seminal volume, Problems in Argument Analysis and Evaluation. Originally published in 1987 by Foris Publications, this was a pioneering work that played a major role in establishing argumentation theory as a discipline. Today, it is as relevant to the field as when it first appeared, with discussions of questions and issues that remain central to the study of argument. It has defined the main approaches to many of those issues (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   128 citations  
  • Are "Gap-Fillers" Missing Premisses?Wayne Grennan - 1994 - Informal Logic 16 (3).
    Identifying the missing or unstated premisses of arguments is important, because their logical quality depends on them. Textbook authors regard enthymematic syllogisms (e.g., "Elvis is a man, so Elvis is mortal") as having an unstated premiss - the major premiss (e.g., "All men are mortal"). They are said to be such because these syllogisms become formally valid when the major premiss is added (i.e., it is a gap-filler). I argue that unstated major premises are not gap-fillers: they support a part (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   16 citations  
  • The Uses of Argument.Stephen E. Toulmin - 1958 - Philosophy 34 (130):244-245.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   693 citations  
  • What Achilles should have said to the Tortoise.J. F. Thomson - 2010 - In Steven Cahn (ed.), Thinking about Logic: Classic Essays. Taylor & Francis.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   18 citations