Results for 'informal logic'

1000+ found
Order:
  1. Review of Informal Logic: A Pragmatic Approach. [REVIEW]Steven W. Patterson - 2009 - Cogency: Journal of Reasoning and Argumentation 1 (1):139-147.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  2. Enhancing the Diagramming Method in Informal Logic.Dale Jacquette - 2011 - Argument: Biannual Philosophical Journal 1 (2):327-360.
    The argument diagramming method developed by Monroe C. Beardsley in his (1950) book Practical Logic, which has since become the gold standard for diagramming arguments in informal logic, makes it possible to map the relation between premises and conclusions of a chain of reasoning in relatively complex ways. The method has since been adapted and developed in a number of directions by many contemporary informal logicians and argumentation theorists. It has proved useful in practical applications and (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  3. An Introduction to Critical Thinking and Symbolic Logic Volume 2: Informal Reasoning Assignments.Rebeka Ferreira & Anthony Ferrucci - 2018 - Open Educational Resource: OpenStax-CNX and Canvas Commons.
    This textbook is not a textbook in the traditional sense. Here, what we have attempted is compile a set of assignments and exercise that may be used in critical thinking courses. To that end, we have tried to make these assignments as diverse as possible while leaving flexibility in their application within the classroom. Of course these assignments and exercises could certainly be used in other classes as well. Our view is that critical thinking courses work best when they are (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  4. A Probabilistic Analysis of Argument Cogency.David Godden & Frank Zenker - 2018 - Synthese 195 (4):1715-1740.
    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 (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  5. Algorithms and Arguments: The Foundational Role of the ATAI-Question.Paola Cantu' & Italo Testa - 2011 - In Frans H. van Eemeren, Bart Garssen, David Godden & Gordon Mitchell (eds.), Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation (pp. 192-203). Rozenberg / Sic Sat.
    Argumentation theory underwent a significant development in the Fifties and Sixties: its revival is usually connected to Perelman's criticism of formal logic and the development of informal logic. Interestingly enough it was during this period that Artificial Intelligence was developed, which defended the following thesis (from now on referred to as the AI-thesis): human reasoning can be emulated by machines. The paper suggests a reconstruction of the opposition between formal and informal logic as a move (...)
    Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  6. Sentence, Proposition, Judgment, Statement, and Fact: Speaking About the Written English Used in Logic.John Corcoran - 2009 - In W. A. Carnielli (ed.), The Many Sides of Logic. College Publications. pp. 71-103.
    The five English words—sentence, proposition, judgment, statement, and fact—are central to coherent discussion in logic. However, each is ambiguous in that logicians use each with multiple normal meanings. Several of their meanings are vague in the sense of admitting borderline cases. In the course of displaying and describing the phenomena discussed using these words, this paper juxtaposes, distinguishes, and analyzes several senses of these and related words, focusing on a constellation of recommended senses. One of the purposes of this (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  7. What is the Correct Logic of Necessity, Actuality and Apriority?Peter Fritz - 2014 - Review of Symbolic Logic 7 (3):385-414.
    This paper is concerned with a propositional modal logic with operators for necessity, actuality and apriority. The logic is characterized by a class of relational structures defined according to ideas of epistemic two-dimensional semantics, and can therefore be seen as formalizing the relations between necessity, actuality and apriority according to epistemic two-dimensional semantics. We can ask whether this logic is correct, in the sense that its theorems are all and only the informally valid formulas. This paper gives (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  8.  61
    Structural Relativity and Informal Rigour.Neil Barton - manuscript
    Informal rigour is the process by which we come to understand particular mathematical structures and then manifest this rigour through axiomatisations. Structural relativity is the idea that the kinds of structures we isolate are dependent upon the logic we employ. We bring together these ideas by considering the level of informal rigour exhibited by our set-theoretic discourse, and argue that it is best captured by a logic intermediate between first- and second-order. We argue that the usual (...)
    Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  9. Problems in Argument Analysis and Evaluation.Trudy Gover - 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   80 citations  
  10. Concept Mapping, Mind Mapping Argument Mapping: What Are the Differences and Do They Matter?W. Martin Davies - 2011 - Higher Education 62 (3):279–301.
    In recent years, academics and educators have begun to use software mapping tools for a number of education-related purposes. Typically, the tools are used to help impart critical and analytical skills to students, to enable students to see relationships between concepts, and also as a method of assessment. The common feature of all these tools is the use of diagrammatic relationships of various kinds in preference to written or verbal descriptions. Pictures and structured diagrams are thought to be more comprehensible (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  11. A Logic for Epistemic Two-Dimensional Semantics.Peter Fritz - 2013 - Synthese 190 (10):1753-1770.
    Epistemic two-dimensional semantics is a theory in the philosophy of language that provides an account of meaning which is sensitive to the distinction between necessity and apriority. While this theory is usually presented in an informal manner, I take some steps in formalizing it in this paper. To do so, I define a semantics for a propositional modal logic with operators for the modalities of necessity, actuality, and apriority that captures the relevant ideas of epistemic two-dimensional semantics. I (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   14 citations  
  12.  36
    Review of John Woods, Truth in Fiction: Rethinking its Logic[REVIEW]Gilbert Plumer - 2020 - Informal Logic 40 (1):147-156.
    This article reviews John Wood’s Truth in Fiction: Rethinking its Logic.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  13. The Founding of Logic.John Corcoran - 1994 - Ancient Philosophy 14 (S1):9-24.
    Since the time of Aristotle's students, interpreters have considered Prior Analytics to be a treatise about deductive reasoning, more generally, about methods of determining the validity and invalidity of premise-conclusion arguments. People studied Prior Analytics in order to learn more about deductive reasoning and to improve their own reasoning skills. These interpreters understood Aristotle to be focusing on two epistemic processes: first, the process of establishing knowledge that a conclusion follows necessarily from a set of premises (that is, on the (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   14 citations  
  14. Introduction to the Special Issue on Critical Thinking in Higher Education.W. Martin Davies - 2011 - Higher Education Research and Development 30 (3):255-260.
    The articles included in this issue represent some of the most recent thinking in the area of critical thinking in higher education. While the emphasis is on work being done in the Australasian region, there are also papers from the USA and UK that demonstrate the international interest in advancing research in the area. -/- ‘Critical thinking’ in the guise of the study of logic and rhetoric has, of course, been around since the days of the ancient Greeks and (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  15. DDL Unlimited: Dynamic Doxastic Logic for Introspective Agents.Sten Lindström & Wlodek Rabinowicz - 1999 - Erkenntnis 50 (2-3):353-385.
    The theories of belief change developed within the AGM-tradition are not logics in the proper sense, but rather informal axiomatic theories of belief change. Instead of characterizing the models of belief and belief change in a formalized object language, the AGM-approach uses a natural language — ordinary mathematical English — to characterize the mathematical structures that are under study. Recently, however, various authors such as Johan van Benthem and Maarten de Rijke have suggested representing doxastic change within a formal (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   24 citations  
  16. Bilateralist Detours: From Intuitionist to Classical Logic and Back.Nils Kürbis - 2017 - Logique Et Analyse 60 (239):301-316.
    There is widespread agreement that while on a Dummettian theory of meaning the justified logic is intuitionist, as its constants are governed by harmonious rules of inference, the situation is reversed on Huw Price's bilateralist account, where meanings are specified in terms of primitive speech acts assertion and denial. In bilateral logics, the rules for classical negation are in harmony. However, as it is possible to construct an intuitionist bilateral logic with harmonious rules, there is no formal argument (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  17. Slippery Slope Arguments.Anneli Jefferson - 2014 - Philosophy Compass 9 (10):672-680.
    Slippery slope arguments are frequently dismissed as fallacious or weak arguments but are nevertheless commonly used in political and bioethical debates. This paper gives an overview of different variants of the argument commonly found in the literature and addresses their argumentative strength and the interrelations between them. The most common variant, the empirical slippery slope argument, predicts that if we do A, at some point the highly undesirable B will follow. I discuss both the question which factors affect likelihood of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  18. Using Computer-Assisted Argument Mapping to Teach Reasoning to Students.Martin Davies, Ashley Barnett & Tim van Gelder - 2019 - In J. Anthony Blair (ed.), Studies in Critical Thinking. Windsor, ON, Canada: Windsor Studies in Argumentation. pp. 131-176.
    Argument mapping is a way of diagramming the logical structure of an argument to explicitly and concisely represent reasoning. The use of argument mapping in critical thinking instruction has increased dramatically in recent decades. This paper overviews the innovation and provides a procedural approach for new teaches wanting to use argument mapping in the classroom. A brief history of argument mapping is provided at the end of this paper.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  19. You Will Respect My Authoritah!? A Reply to Botting.Moti Mizrahi - 2019 - Informal Logic 39 (1):106-122.
    In a paper and a reply to critics published in _Informal Logic_, I argue that arguments from expert opinion are weak arguments. To appeal to expert opinion is to take an expert’s judgment that _p_ is the case as evidence for _p_. Such appeals to expert opinion are weak, I argue, because the fact that an expert judges that _p_ does not make it significantly more likely that _p_ is true or probable, as evidence from empirical studies on expert performance (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  20.  87
    Computer-Assisted Argument Mapping: A Rationale Approach.Martin Davies - 2009 - Higher Education 58:799-820.
    Computer-Assisted Argument Mapping (CAAM) is a new way of understanding arguments. While still embryonic in its development and application, CAAM is being used increasingly as a training and development tool in the professions and government. Inroads are also being made in its application within education. CAAM claims to be helpful in an educational context, as a tool for students in responding to assessment tasks. However, to date there is little evidence from students that this is the case. This paper outlines (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  21. Computer-Aided Argument Mapping and the Teaching of Critical Thinking (Part 1).Martin Davies - 2012 - Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines 27 (2):15-30.
    This paper is in two parts. Part I outlines three traditional approaches to the teaching of critical thinking: the normative, cognitive psychology, and educational approaches. Each of these approaches is discussed in relation to the influences of various methods of critical thinking instruction. The paper contrasts these approaches with what I call the “visualisation” approach. This approach is explained with reference to computer-aided argument mapping (CAAM) which uses dedicated computer software to represent inferences between premise and conclusions. The paper presents (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  22.  82
    'Not Quite Right': Helping Students to Make Better Arguments.W. Martin Davies - 2008 - Teaching in Higher Education 13 (3):327-340.
    This paper looks at the need for a better understanding of the impediments to critical thinking in relation to graduate student work. The paper argues that a distinction is needed between two vectors that influence student writing: (1) the word-level–sentence-level vector; and (2) the grammar–inferencing vector. It is suggested that much of the work being done to assist students is only done on the first vector. This paper suggests a combination of explicit use of deductive syllogistic inferences and computer-aided argument (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  23. Notice of 'Interpretar y Argumentar' by María G. Navarro.Noemi de Haro - 2012 - Revista Areté (1):217-219.
    ¿Qué es razonar?, ¿qué es interpretar?, ¿cómo podemos estar seguros de que determinadas interpretaciones, en ciertos contextos políticos, sociales, culturales, etc., son más razonables que otras? Estas preguntas se encuentran en el origen de dos tradiciones de pensamiento: la hermenéutica y la analítica.
    Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  24. Informal Reasoning and Logical Formalization.Michael Baumgartner - 2010 - In S. Conrad & S. Imhof (eds.), Ding und Begriff. Ontos.
    According to a prevalent view among philosophers formal logic is the philosopher’s main tool to assess the validity of arguments, i.e. the philosopher’s ars iudicandi. By drawing on a famous dispute between Russell and Strawson over the validity of a certain kind of argument – of arguments whose premises feature definite descriptions – this paper casts doubt on the accuracy of the ars iudicandi conception. Rather than settling the question whether the contentious arguments are valid or not, Russell and (...)
    Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  25. Extending Dynamic Doxastic Logic: Accommodating Iterated Beliefs And Ramsey Conditionals Within DDL.Sten Lindström & Wiodek Rabinowicz - 1997 - In Lars Lindahl, Paul Needham & Ryszard Sliwinski (eds.), For Good Measure. Uppsala, Sverige:
    In this paper we distinguish between various kinds of doxastic theories. One distinction is between informal and formal doxastic theories. AGM-type theories of belief change are of the former kind, while Hintikka’s logic of knowledge and belief is of the latter. Then we distinguish between static theories that study the unchanging beliefs of a certain agent and dynamic theories that investigate not only the constraints that can reasonably be imposed on the doxastic states of a rational agent but (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  26. The Logic and Topology of Kant's Temporal Continuum.Riccardo Pinosio & Michiel van Lambalgen - manuscript
    In this article we provide a mathematical model of Kant?s temporal continuum that satisfies the (not obviously consistent) synthetic a priori principles for time that Kant lists in the Critique of pure Reason (CPR), the Metaphysical Foundations of Natural Science (MFNS), the Opus Postumum and the notes and frag- ments published after his death. The continuum so obtained has some affinities with the Brouwerian continuum, but it also has ‘infinitesimal intervals’ consisting of nilpotent infinitesimals, which capture Kant’s theory of rest (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  27. Arguments Whose Strength Depends on Continuous Variation.James Franklin - 2013 - Informal Logic 33 (1):33-56.
    Both the traditional Aristotelian and modern symbolic approaches to logic have seen logic in terms of discrete symbol processing. Yet there are several kinds of argument whose validity depends on some topological notion of continuous variation, which is not well captured by discrete symbols. Examples include extrapolation and slippery slope arguments, sorites, fuzzy logic, and those involving closeness of possible worlds. It is argued that the natural first attempts to analyze these notions and explain their relation to (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  28. Feminist Perspectives on Argumentation.Catherine E. Hundleby - forthcoming - 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   1 citation  
  29. Unpacking the Logic of Mathematical Statements.Annie Selden - 1995 - Educational Studies in Mathematics 29:123-151.
    This study focuses on undergraduate students' ability to unpack informally written mathematical statements into the language of predicate calculus. Data were collected between 1989 and 1993 from 61students in six small sections of a “bridge" course designed to introduce proofs and mathematical reasoning. We discuss this data from a perspective that extends the notion of concept image to that of statement image and introduces the notion of proof framework to indicate the top-level logical structure of a proof. For simplified (...) calculus statements, just 8.5% of unpacking attempts were successful; for actual statements from calculus texts, this dropped to 5%. We infer that these students would be unable to reliably relate informally stated theorems with the top-level logical structure of their proofs and hence could not be expected to construct proofs or evaluate their validity. (shrink)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  30. On Novels as Arguments.Gilbert Plumer - 2015 - Informal Logic 35 (4):488-507.
    If novels can be arguments, that fact should shape logic or argumentation studies as well as literary studies. Two senses the term ‘narrative argument’ might have are (a) a story that offers an argument, or (b) a distinctive argument form. I consider whether there is a principled way of extracting a novel’s argument in sense (a). Regarding the possibility of (b), Hunt’s view is evaluated that many fables and much fabulist literature inherently, and as wholes, have an analogical argument (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  31. Necessary Assumptions.Gilbert Plumer - 1999 - Informal Logic 19 (1):41-61.
    In their book EVALUATING CRITICAL THINKING Stephen Norris and Robert Ennis say: “Although it is tempting to think that certain [unstated] assumptions are logically necessary for an argument or position, they are not. So do not ask for them.” Numerous writers of introductory logic texts as well as various highly visible standardized tests (e.g., the LSAT and GRE) presume that the Norris/Ennis view is wrong; the presumption is that many arguments have (unstated) necessary assumptions and that readers and test (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  32. Critical Thinking Education and Debiasing.Tim Kenyon & Guillaume Beaulac - 2014 - Informal Logic 34 (4):341-363.
    There are empirical grounds to doubt the effectiveness of a common and intuitive approach to teaching debiasing strategies in critical thinking courses. We summarize some of the grounds before suggesting a broader taxonomy of debiasing strategies. This four-level taxonomy enables a useful diagnosis of biasing factors and situations, and illuminates more strategies for more effective bias mitigation located in the shaping of situational factors and reasoning infrastructure—sometimes called “nudges” in the literature. The question, we contend, then becomes how best to (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   21 citations  
  33. The Limitations of the Open Mind.Jeremy Fantl - 2018 - Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
    When should you engage with difficult arguments against your cherished controversial beliefs? The primary conclusion of this book is that your obligations to engage with counterarguments are more limited than is often thought. In some standard situations, you shouldn't engage with difficult counterarguments and, if you do, you shouldn't engage with them open-mindedly. This conclusion runs counter to aspects of the Millian political tradition and political liberalism, as well as what people working in informal logic tend to say (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  34. Deontic Logic and Natural Language.Fabrizio Cariani - forthcoming - In Dov Gabbay, Ron van der Meyden, John Horty, Xavier Parent & Leandert van der Torre (eds.), The Handbook of Deontic Logic (Vol. II). College Publications.
    There has been a recent surge of work on deontic modality within philosophy of language. This work has put the deontic logic tradition in contact with natural language semantics, resulting in significant increase in sophistication on both ends. This chapter surveys the main motivations, achievements, and prospects of this work.
    Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  35. Why Arguments From Expert Opinion Are Still Weak: A Reply to Seidel.Moti Mizrahi - 2016 - Informal Logic 36 (2):238-252.
    In this paper, I reply to Seidel’s objections against my argument from expert performance to the effect that arguments from expert opinion are weak arguments. I clarify what Seidel takes to be unclear points in my argument and show that it withstands Seidel’s objections.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  36. Verbal Sparring and Apologetic Points: Politeness in Gendered Argumentation Contexts.Sylvia Burrow - 2010 - Informal Logic 30 (3):235-262.
    This essay argues that ideals of cooperation or adversariality in argumentation are not equally attainable for women. Women in argumentation contexts face oppressive limitations undermining argument success because their authority is undermined by gendered norms of politeness. Women endorsing or, alternatively, transgressing feminine norms of politeness typically defend their authority in argumentation contexts. And yet, defending authority renders it less legitimate. My argument focuses on women in philosophy but bears the implication that other masculine dis- course contexts present similar double (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   11 citations  
  37. Defeasible Classifications and Inferences From Definitions.Fabrizio Macagno & Douglas Walton - 2010 - Informal Logic 30 (1):34-61.
    We contend that it is possible to argue reasonably for and against arguments from classifications and definitions, provided they are seen as defeasible (subject to exceptions and critical questioning). Arguments from classification of the most common sorts are shown to be based on defeasible reasoning of various kinds represented by patterns of logical reasoning called defeasible argumentation schemes. We show how such schemes can be identified with heuristics, or short-cut solutions to a problem. We examine a variety of arguments of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   10 citations  
  38. The Presumptions of Meaning. Hamblin and Equivocation.Fabrizio Macagno - 2011 - Informal Logic 31 (4):367-393.
    When we use a word, we face a crucial epistemic gap: we ground our move on the fact that our interlocutor knows the meaning of the word we used, and therefore he can interpret our dialogical intention. However, how is it possible to know the other’s mind? Hamblin explained this dialogical problem advancing the idea of dialectical meaning: on his view, the use of a word is based on a set of presumptions. Building on this approach, the use of a (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  39. Functionalism, Normativity and the Concept of Argumentation.Steven W. Patterson - 2011 - Informal Logic 31 (1):1-26.
    In her 2007 paper, “Argument Has No Function” Jean Goodwin takes exception with what she calls the “explicit function claims”, arguing that not only are function-based accounts of argumentation insufficiently motivated, but they fail to ground claims to normativity. In this paper I stake out the beginnings of a functionalist answer to Goodwin.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  40. A Picture Held Us Captive: The Later Wittgenstein and Visual Argumentation.Steven W. Patterson - 2011 - Cogency: Journal of Reasoning and Argumentation 2 (2):105-134.
    The issue of whether or not there are visual arguments has been an issue in informal logic and argumentation theory at least since 1996. In recent years, books, sections of prominent conferences and special journals issues have been devoted to it, thus significantly raising the profile of the debate. In this paper I will attempt to show how the views of the later Wittgenstein, particularly his views on images and the no- tion of “picturing”, can be brought to (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  41. Counterfactuals and the Law.Simon Beck - 1993 - South African Journal of Philosophy 12 (3).
    This article is concerned with the place counterfactual reasoning occupies in South African law, and how philosophy might be able to help the law. I point out some of the more important and unavoidable uses of counterfactual reasoning in our law. Following this I make some suggestions as to how philosophy, and especially informal logic, can be of help to the law. Finally, I make some suggestions as to how the law in turn can help philosophy.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  42. Analogical Arguings and Explainings.Fred Johnson - 1989 - Informal Logic 11 (3).
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  43. Deductively-Inductively.Fred Johnson - 1980 - Informal Logic 3 (1):4-5.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  44. Are Fallacies Common? A Look at Two Debates.Gary James Jason - 1986 - Informal Logic 8 (2).
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  45. Critical Thinking and Transcendence : Towards Kantian Ideals of Reason.Christina Hendricks - manuscript
    Paper presented at the Association for Informal Logic and Critical Thinking meeting in conjunction with the Central Division of the American Philosophical Association, Chicago, April 2004.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  46.  94
    Arguings and Arguments.Fred Johnson - 1984 - Informal Logic 6 (2):26-27.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  47.  76
    De Bono`s I Am Right You Are Wrong.Michael Rowan - 1992 - Informal Logic 14 (2).
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  48.  56
    Fallacies Are Common.Gary James Jason - 1989 - Informal Logic 11 (2).
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  49. Truthmaker Semantics for Relevant Logic.Mark Jago - forthcoming - Journal of Philosophical Logic:1-22.
    I develop and defend a truthmaker semantics for the relevant logic R. The approach begins with a simple philosophical idea and develops it in various directions, so as to build a technically adequate relevant semantics. The central philosophical idea is that truths are true in virtue of specific states. Developing the idea formally results in a semantics on which truthmakers are relevant to what they make true. A very natural notion of conditionality is added, giving us relevant implication. I (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  50. Logic and Semantics for Imperatives.Nate Charlow - 2014 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 43 (4):617-664.
    In this paper I will develop a view about the semantics of imperatives, which I term Modal Noncognitivism, on which imperatives might be said to have truth conditions (dispositionally, anyway), but on which it does not make sense to see them as expressing propositions (hence does not make sense to ascribe to them truth or falsity). This view stands against “Cognitivist” accounts of the semantics of imperatives, on which imperatives are claimed to express propositions, which are then enlisted in explanations (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   26 citations  
1 — 50 / 1000