-
Douglas Walton’s Contributions in Education Informal Logic (IF 0.9) Pub Date : 2022-03-16 Chrysi Rapanta
Douglas Walton, perhaps the most prolific author in Argumentation theory, has been of a great influence in the fields of Informal logic, Artificial intelligence, and Law. His contributions in the field of educational research, in particular in the field of argumentation and education, are less known. This review paper aims at shedding light on those aspects of Walton’s theory that have received educational
-
Introduction to the Special Issue Informal Logic (IF 0.9) Pub Date : 2022-03-16 Fabrizio Macagno,Alice Toniolo
Douglas Walton’s work is extremely vast, multifaceted, and interdisciplinary. He developed theoretical proposals that have been used in disciplines that are not traditionally related to philosophy, such as law, education, discourse analysis, artificial intelligence, or medical communication. Through his papers and books, Walton redefined the boundaries not only of argumentation theory, but also logic
-
A Pragmatic Account of Rephrase in Argumentation Informal Logic (IF 0.9) Pub Date : 2022-03-16 Marcin Koszowy,Steve Oswald,Katarzyna Budzynska,Barbara Konat,Pascal Gygax
In the spirit of the pragmatic account of quotation and reporting offered by Macagno and Walton (2017), we outline a systematic pragmatic account of rephrasing. For this purpose, we combine two interrelated methods of inquiry into the variety of uses of rephrase as a persuasive device: (i) the annotation of rephrase types to identify locutionary and illocutionary aspects of rephrase, (ii) the crowd–sourced
-
An Epistemological Appraisal of Walton’s Argument Schemes Informal Logic (IF 0.9) Pub Date : 2022-03-16 Christoph Lumer
The article critically discusses Walton’s (and co-authors’) argument scheme approach to good argumentation. Four characteristics of Walton’s approach are presented: 1. Argument schemes provide normative requirements. 2. These schemata are enthymematic. 3. There are associated critical questions. 4. The method is inductive, abstracting schemata from groups of similar arguments. Four adequacy conditions
-
On Appeals to Non-existent Authorities as Arguments from Analogy Informal Logic (IF 0.9) Pub Date : 2021-12-07 Martin Hinton
Herein, I consider arguments resting on an appeal to a non-existent authority as a species of argument from authority, and ultimately show them to be reliant on arguments from analogy in their inferential force. Three sub-types of argument are discussed: from authorities as yet unborn, no longer living, or incapable of ever doing so. In each case it is shown that an element of arguing from analogy
-
Discovering Warrants in Political Argumentation Informal Logic (IF 0.9) Pub Date : 2021-12-07 Irmtraud Gallhofer,Willem Saris
Philosophers deny a proposal for actions can be deduced from arguments for or against the proposal because they may be incompatible. Nevertheless, people in general, and politicians especially, make decisions and present arguments they believe are convincing. We studied politicians who made decisions in complex situations. They spoke about possible actions, their consequences, the probabilities of
-
The Distinction Between False Dilemma and False Disjunctive Syllogism Informal Logic (IF 0.9) Pub Date : 2021-12-07 Taeda Tomic
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
-
A Simple Theory of Argument Schemes Informal Logic (IF 0.9) Pub Date : 2021-12-07 Geoff Goddu
While there has been in depth discussion of many particular argumentation schemes, some lament that there is little to no theory underpinning the notion of an argumentation scheme. Here I shall argue against the utility of argument schemes, at least as a fundamental part of a complete theory of arguments. I shall also present and defend a minimalist theory of their nature—a scheme is just a set of
-
Illocutionary Performance and Objective Assessment in the Speech Act of Arguing Informal Logic (IF 0.9) Pub Date : 2021-09-09 Cristina Corredor
This paper endorses a view of argumentation and arguments that relates both to a special type of speech action, namely, the performance of speech acts of arguing. Its aim is to advance an analysis of those acts that takes into account two kinds of norms related to their correct performance, namely, felicity conditions and objective requirements related to the “correspondence with the facts.” It assumes
-
Introduction to the Special Issue Informal Logic (IF 0.9) Pub Date : 2021-09-09 Lilian Bermejo-Luque,Andrei Moldovan
-
Hermeneutic Priority of Which Question? Informal Logic (IF 0.9) Pub Date : 2021-09-09 Nathan Dickman
An axiom of philosophical hermeneutics is that questioning has hermeneutic priority. Yet there are many different kinds of questions. Which sort has priority in understanding complete thoughts and for bringing about a fusion of horizons? Speech act theory is one resource for specifying which kind. I first develop the broad notion of questioning in philosophical hermeneutics. Second, I examine aspects
-
Speech Act Pluralism in Argumentative Polylogues Informal Logic (IF 0.9) Pub Date : 2021-09-09 Marcin Lewinski
I challenge two key assumptions of speech act theory, as applied to argumentation: illocutionary monism, grounded in the idea each utterance has only one (primary) illocutionary force, and the dyadic reduction, which models interaction as a dyadic affair between only two agents (speaker-hearer, proponentopponent). I show how major contributions to speech act inspired study of argumentation adhere to
-
Credible as Evidence? Multilayered Audience Reception of Narrative Arguments Informal Logic (IF 0.9) Pub Date : 2021-06-01 Jarmila Bubikova-Moan
Building on a view of both narration and argumentation as dynamic concepts, this paper considers ways of assessing the credibility of narrative arguments constructed in empirical examples of conversational discourse. I argue that the key in any such exercise is to pay close attention to both structural and pragmatic details, particularly how conversational storytelling gets embedded in the surrounding
-
Metaphilosophy and Argument: The Case of the Justification of Abduction Informal Logic (IF 0.9) Pub Date : 2021-06-01 Paula Olmos
This paper is an essay on metaphilosophy that reviews, describes, categorises, and discusses different ways philosophers have approached the justification of abduction as a mode of reasoning and arguing. Advocating an argumentative approach to abduction, I model the philosophical debate over its justification as the critical assessment of a warrant-establishing argument allowing “H explains D” to be
-
Argumentation Ab Homine in Philosophy Informal Logic (IF 0.9) Pub Date : 2021-06-01 Fernando Leal
Argumentation that uses the beliefs of one’s opponents to refute them is well known (ad hominem in the classical sense). This paper proposes that there is a hitherto unnoticed counterpart to it, to be called ab homine, in which speakers/writers argue through the manner in which they deliver a message. Since the manner of delivery can never be turned into a premise or premises, this form of argumentation—although
-
Decoupling Representations and the Chain of Arguments Informal Logic (IF 0.9) Pub Date : 2021-06-01 Cristián Santibáñez
In this paper, I propose to understand argumentative decoupling—that is, the structural fact of the argumentative chain self-referring to one (or more) of its constituents (reason, data, conclusion, point of view) in subsequent arguments—as part of the way in which cognitive decoupling representation works. In order to support this claim, I make use of part of the discussion developed in cognitive
-
Some Limits to Arguing Virtuously Informal Logic (IF 0.9) Pub Date : 2021-03-02 Tracy Bowell
In this paper, I consider whether there are limits to virtuous argumentation in certain situations. I consider three types of cases: 1) arguing against denier discourses, 2) arguing with people who make bigoted claims, and 3) cases in which marginalised people are expected to exercise virtues of argument from a position of limited agency. For each type of case, I look at where limits to arguing responsibly
-
Youth Voting, Rational Competency, and Epistemic Injustice Informal Logic (IF 0.9) Pub Date : 2021-03-02 Michael Baumtrog
In 1970 the voting age in Canada changed from 21 to 18. Since then, there have been calls to lower it further, most commonly to age 16. Against the motion, however, it has been argued that youth may lack the ability to exercise a mature and informed vote. This paper argues against that worry and shows how restricting youth from voting on the basis of a misbelief about their abilities amounts to an
-
"Argument and Social Justice" and "Reasoning for Change" Informal Logic (IF 0.9) Pub Date : 2021-03-02 Catherine Hundleby
-
Deep Disagreement and Patience as an Argumentative Virtue Informal Logic (IF 0.9) Pub Date : 2021-03-02 Kathryn Phillips
During a year when there is much tumult around the world and in the United States in particular, it might be surprising to encounter a paper about patience and argumentation. In this paper, I explore the notion of deep disagreement, with an eye to moral and political contexts in particular, in order to motivate the idea that patience is an argumentative virtue that we ought to cultivate. This is particularly
-
“I Said What I Said”—Black Women and Argumentative Politeness Norms Informal Logic (IF 0.9) Pub Date : 2021-03-02 Tempest Henning
This paper seeks to complicate two primary norms within argumentation theory: 1) engaging with one’s interlocutors in a ‘pleasant’ tone and 2) speaking directly to one’s target audience/interlocutor. Moreover, I urge argumentation theorists to explore various cultures’ argumentative norms and practices when attempting to formulate more universal theories regarding argumentation. Ultimately, I aim to
-
Picturing a Thousand Unspoken Words Informal Logic (IF 0.9) Pub Date : 2021-03-02 Harmony Peach
I explore how empathetic visual argument may be the mode best suited for eliciting appropriate force to the reasons given by arguers who face systematic identity prejudices. In the verbal mode, this force is often skewed through epistemic injustice (Fricker 2007), argumentative injustice (Bondy 2010), and discursive injustice (Kukla 2010). Highlighting their reliance on the Aristotelian sense of enthymeme
-
Is it Permissible to Teach Buddhist Mindfulness Meditation in a Critical Thinking Course? Informal Logic (IF 0.9) Pub Date : 2020-12-18 Anand Jayprakash Vaidya
Abstract: In this essay I set out the case for why mindfulness meditation should be included in critical thinking education, especially with respect to educating people about how to argue with one another. In 1, I introduce to distinct mind sets, the critical mind and the meditative mind, and show that they are in apparent tension with one another. Then by examining the Delphi Report on Critical Thinking
-
Good and Bad Reasoning about COVID-19 Informal Logic (IF 0.9) Pub Date : 2020-12-18 Louise Cummings
The Covid-19 pandemic presents argumentation theorists with an opportunity to reflect on the ways in which people, agencies and governments respond to the emergence of a new virus. Reponses have revealed a range of judgements and decisions, not all of which are rationally warranted. This article will examine errors in reasoning, several of which have reduced the public’s compliance with important health
-
Exploring the Effect of a Scaffolding Design on Students’ Argument Critique Skills Informal Logic (IF 0.9) Pub Date : 2020-12-18 Yi Song,Szu-Fu Chao,Yigal Attali
We designed scaffolded tasks that targeted the skill of identifying reasoning errors and conducted a study with 472 middle school students. The study results showed a small positive impact of the scaffolding on student performance on one topic, but not the other, indicating that student skills of writing critiques could be affected by the topic and argument content. Additionally, students from low-SES
-
Putting Reasons in their Place Informal Logic (IF 0.9) Pub Date : 2020-12-18 José Ángel Gascón
Hilary Kornblith has criticised reasons-based approaches to epistemic justification on the basis of psychological research that shows that reflection is unreliable. Human beings, it seems, are not very good at identifying our own cognitive processes and the causes of our beliefs. In this article I defend a conception of reasons that takes those empirical findings into account and can avoid Kornblith’s
-
What is Wrong with Deductivism? Informal Logic (IF 0.9) Pub Date : 2020-08-31 Lilian Bermejo-Luque
In “Deductivism as an Interpretative Strategy: A Reply to Groarke’s Defense of Reconstructive Deductivism,” David Godden (2005) distinguished two notions of deductivism. On the one hand, as an interpretative thesis, deductivism is the view that all-natural language argumentation must be interpreted as being deductive. On the other hand, as an evaluative thesis, deductivism is the view that for a conclusion
-
Justifying Particular Reasoning in a Legal Context Informal Logic (IF 0.9) Pub Date : 2020-08-29 Jingjing Wu
Particular reasoning is arguably the most common type of legal reasoning. Neil MacCormick proposed that, in a legal context, justifiable particular reasoning has to be universalizable. This paper aims to: (1) investigate MacCormick’s thesis; (2) explain how a particular can ever be universal by drawing inspiration from Scott Brewer’s formula on reasoning by analogy; (3) further comprehend MacCormick’s
-
Source Related Argumentation Found in Science Websites Informal Logic (IF 0.9) Pub Date : 2020-08-29 Ralph Barnes, Zoë Neumann, Samuel Draznin-Nagy
In this paper, we consider the way that web documents seeking to persuade readers of certain science claims provide information about the sources of the arguments. Our quantitative analysis reveals that web documents in our sample include hundreds of examples in which the reader is provided information regarding the trustworthiness (or lack thereof) of sources. The web documents also contain a large
-
Other-Regarding Virtues and Their Place in Virtue Argumentation Theory Informal Logic (IF 0.9) Pub Date : 2020-08-29 Felipe Oliveira de Sousa
In this paper, I argue that, despite the progress made in recent years, virtue argumentation theory still lacks a more systematic acknowledgment of other-regarding virtues. A fuller recognition of such virtues not only enriches the field of research of virtue argumentation theory in significant ways, but also allows for a richer and more intuitive view of the virtuous arguer. A fully virtuous arguer
-
Rooting Gilbert's Multi-Modal Argumentation in Jung, and Its Extension to Law Informal Logic (IF 0.9) Pub Date : 2020-08-29 Marko Novak
This paper discusses how an understanding of Jung's psychological types is important for the relevance of Gilbert's multi-modal argumentation theory. Moreover, it highlights how the types have been confirmed by contemporary neuroscience and cognitive psychology. Based on Gilbert's approach, I extend multimodal argumentation to the area of legal argumentation. It seems that when we leave behind the
-
CAT Scan: A Critical Review of the Critical-Thinking Assessment Test Informal Logic (IF 0.9) Pub Date : 2020-08-29 Kevin Possin
The CAT is entirely dedicated to assessing the critical-thinking skills involved in scientific reasoning and practical problem solving. While the test is found to have reasonable content validity, various issues with its prompts are discussed, along with significant issues with its scoring. The CAT’s recommended use as a “model” for curricular changes, called CAT Apps, is criticized as “teaching to
-
Review of Narration as Argument, edited by Paula Olmos Informal Logic (IF 0.9) Pub Date : 2020-08-29 Max Dosser
This article reviews Paula Olmos’s Narration as Argument collection (Springer 2017). Résumé: Cet article est une critique de Narration as Argument (Springer 2017) de Paula Olmos.
-
Resolution of Deep Disagreement: Not Simply Consensus Informal Logic (IF 0.9) Pub Date : 2020-08-29 Leah Henderson
Robert Fogelin has argued that in deep disagreements, resolution cannot be achieved by rational argumentation. In response, Richard Feldman has claimed that deep disagreements can be resolved in a similar way to more everyday disagreements. I argue that Feldman’s claim is based on a relatively superficial notion of “resolution” of a disagreement whereas the notion at stake in Fogelin’s argument is
-
An Unlikely Source of (Absurd and Effective) Case Studies for Introductory Informal Logic Informal Logic (IF 0.9) Pub Date : 2020-08-29 Kamil Lemanek
This short work presents a popular fringe theory as a source of case studies for use in teaching informal logic in an introductory course. It puts forward ancient astronaut theory as the candidate source, together with a characterization of why it fits the bill. The televised material associated with that theory is well suited to being used as case studies given that they are easy to follow, contain
-
Should Climate Scientists Fly? Informal Logic (IF 0.9) Pub Date : 2020-07-06 Jean Goodwin
I inquire into argument at the system level, exploring the controversy over whether climate scientists should fly. I document participants’ knowledge of a skeptical argument that because scientists fly, they cannot testify credibly about the climate emergency. I show how this argument has been managed by pro-climate action arguers, and how some climate scientists have developed parallel reasoning,
-
On Presumptions, Burdens of Proof, and Explanations Informal Logic (IF 0.9) Pub Date : 2020-07-06 Petar Bodlović
On the standard view, all presumptions share the same deontic function: they asymmetrically allocate the burden of proof. But what, exactly, does this function amount to? Once presumptions are rejected, do they place the burden of arguing, the burden of explanation, or the most general burden of reasoning on their opponents? In this paper, I take into account the differences between cognitive and practical
-
Evidence, Persuasion and Diversity Informal Logic (IF 0.9) Pub Date : 2020-07-06 Derek Allen
My topic is the theme of the E-OSSA 12 conference, namely Evidence, Persuasion and Diversity. I will present relevant material from a selection of Canadian legal cases, along with background information as needed and commentary. My primary focus will be on two landmark Supreme Court of Canada cases—an Aboriginal law case and a case that was both a constitutional law case and a criminal law case.
-
The Role of Trust in Argumentation Informal Logic (IF 0.9) Pub Date : 2020-07-06 Catarina Dutilh Novaes
Argumentation is important for sharing knowledge and infor-mation. Given that the receiver of an argument purportedly engages first and foremost with its content, one might expect trust to play a negligible epistemic role, as opposed to its crucial role in testimony. I argue on the con-trary that trust plays a fundamental role in argumentative engagement. I pre-sent a realistic social epistemological
-
Review of Truth in Fiction: Rethinking its Logic Informal Logic (IF 0.9) Pub Date : 2020-02-28 Gilbert Plumer
This article reviews John Wood’s Truth in Fiction: Rethinking its Logic (Springer 2018). Résumé: Cet article est une critique de La vérité dans la fiction: repenser sa logique (Springer 2018) de John Woods.
-
Review of Argumentation Theory: A Pragma-Dialectical Perspective Informal Logic (IF 0.9) Pub Date : 2020-02-28 David H. Zarefsky
This article reviews Frans H. van Eemeren’s Argumentation Theory: A Pragma-Dialectical Perspective (Springer 2018). Résumé: Cet article est une critique de Théorie de l'argumentation: une perspective pragma-dialectique (Springer 2018) de Frans H. van Eemeren.
-
Come Now, Let Us Reason Together Informal Logic (IF 0.9) Pub Date : 2020-02-28 Austin Dacey
In defending a new framework for incorporating metacognitive debiasing strategies into critical thinking education, Jeffrey Maynes (2015; 2017) draws on ecological rationality theory to argue that in felicitous environments, agents will achieve greater epistemic success by relying on heuristics rather than more ideally rational procedures. He considers a challenge presented by Mercier and Sperber’s
-
Profiles of Dialogue for Amphiboly Informal Logic (IF 0.9) Pub Date : 2020-02-28 Douglas Walton
Amphiboly has been widely recognized, starting from the time of Aristotle, as an informal fallacy arising from grammatical ambiguity. This paper applies the profiles of dialogue tool to the fallacy of amphiboly, providing a five-step evidence-based procedure whereby a syntactically ambiguous sentence uttered in a natural language text can be evaluated as committing a fallacy of amphiboly (or not).
-
Adversariality and Argumentation Informal Logic (IF 0.9) Pub Date : 2020-02-28 John Casey
The concept of adversariality, like that of argument, admits of significant variation. As a consequence, I argue, the question of adversarial argument has not been well understood. After defining adversariality, I argue that if we take argument to be about beliefs, rather than commitments, then two considerations show that adversariality is an essential part of it. First, beliefs are not under our
-
Proposal of a Classification of Analogies Informal Logic (IF 0.9) Pub Date : 2020-02-28 David Alvargonzález
In this paper, I will propose a classification of analogies based on their internal structure. Selecting the criteria used in that classification first requires discussing the minimal constitutive parts of any analogy. Accordingly, I will discuss the differences between analogy and similarity and between analogy and “synalogy,” and I will stress the importance of the analogy of operations and procedures
-
Emotions in Argumentative Narration Informal Logic (IF 0.9) Pub Date : 2019-12-17 Sara Cigada
This paper studies emotional inferencing triggered by emotion terms using Pragma-Dialectics and the Argumentum Model of Topics. The corpus, in French, is an excerpt of a video-recorded testimony in which a middle school teacher evokes her experience of being in class the day after the Charlie Hebdo attack, thus presenting a case of argumentation in context. The analysis focuses on the argumentative
-
Emotive Figures as "Shown" Emotion in Italian Post-Unification Conduct Books (1860-1900) Informal Logic (IF 0.9) Pub Date : 2019-12-16 Annick Paternoster
Within a digital corpus of 20 Italian post-unification conduct books (1860 to 1900), UAM CorpusTool is used to perform a manual annotation of 13 emotive rhetorical figures as indices of “shown” emotion (emotion montree, Micheli 2014). The analysis consists in two text mining tasks: classification, which identifies emotive figures using the 13 categories, and clustering, which identifies groups, i.e
-
The Rhetorical and Argumentative Relevance of "Extreme Consequence" in Advertising Informal Logic (IF 0.9) Pub Date : 2019-12-14 Sabrina Mazzali-Lurati, Chiara Pollaroli, Daniela Marcantonio
The “extreme consequence” is a very common pattern in advertising messages that presents an odd, even negative, situation resulting from the use of the advertised product as a good reason to buy it. By analyzing selected advertisements employing this pattern using the conceptual integration theory and the Argumentum Model of Topics, we aim to understand how “extreme consequence” works at the rhetorical
-
Tense Arguments Informal Logic (IF 0.9) Pub Date : 2019-12-14 Christian Plantin
Tension is a major issue in the analysis of argumentative discourse in ordinary language. Tension is an operator showing that the speaker is highly involved in her speech, and wants to share her commitments, that is, wants to persuade her audience. This paper proposes a case study of an extremely tense and controversial argument with strong anti-Semitic undertones (§2). The following sections examine
-
Argumentative Strategies and Stylistic Devices Informal Logic (IF 0.9) Pub Date : 2019-12-14 Ton Van Haaften
The extended pragma-dialectical argumentation theory assumes that people engaged in argumentative discourse manoeuvre strategically. In argumentative reality, the strategic manoeuvring is often carried out according to an argumentative strategy. Language users make an effort to present their strategic manoeuvres in a specific way and the analysis of the stylistic choices in actual argumentative discourse
-
Old Delivery and Modern Demagogy Informal Logic (IF 0.9) Pub Date : 2019-12-14 Andrea Balbo
My paper aims to find potential elements of comparison between ancient oratoria popularis and modern populist oratory. I will consider case studies drawn from Gracchan speech style and from the oratory of Donald Trump.
-
Frozen Informal Logic (IF 0.9) Pub Date : 2019-12-11 Kati Hannken-Illjes, Ines Bose
In this study, we consider the ways different degrees of dissent are established in interaction, especially in interactions among children. One important aspect in the development of the ability to argue is the framing of interactions as rather cooperative or agonistic. Different framings seem to allow for different forms of argumentative activity. The focus in this paper is on the mediation of degrees
-
Pressure and Argumentation in Public Controversies Informal Logic (IF 0.9) Pub Date : 2019-09-30 Jan Albert Van Laar, Erik C. W. Krabbe
When can exerting pressure in a public controversy promote reasonable outcomes, and when is it rather a hindrance? We show how negotiation and persuasion dialogue can be intertwined. Then, we examine in what ways one can in a public controversy exert pressure on others through sanctions or rewards. Finally, we discuss from the viewpoints of persuasion and negotiation whether and, if so, how pressure
-
Emotive Meaning in Political Argumentation Informal Logic (IF 0.9) Pub Date : 2019-09-30 Fabrizio Macagno, Douglas Walton
Donald Trump’s speeches and messages are characterized by terms that are commonly referred to as “thick” or “emotive,” meaning that they are characterized by a tendency to be used to generate emotive reactions. This paper investigates how emotive meaning is related to emotions, and how it is generated or manipulated. Emotive meaning is analyzed as an evaluative conclusion that results from inferences
-
Educating Students to Consistency via Argumentation Informal Logic (IF 0.9) Pub Date : 2019-09-30 Elisabetta Montanari
In this paper, the role played in learning to argue by an essential and yet under-researched epistemic and argumentative norm is discussed, namely, the consistency requirement. An argumentative intervention is presented, that is designed to enhance the understanding of this norm among high school students, to enable them to recognize contradictions in the process of argumentation and to familiarize
-
Informalizing Formal Logic Informal Logic (IF 0.9) Pub Date : 2019-06-05 Antonis Kakas
This paper presents a way in which formal logic can be understood and reformulated in terms of argumentation that can help us unify formal and informal reasoning. Classical deductive reasoning will be expressed entirely in terms of notions and concepts from argumentation so that formal logical entailment is equivalently captured via the arguments that win between those supporting concluding formulae
-
Is an Appeal to Popularity a Fallacy of Popularity? Informal Logic (IF 0.9) Pub Date : 2019-06-05 Don Dedrick
It is common to view appeals to popularity as fallacious. We argue this is a mistake and that Condorcet’s jury theorem can be used to justify at least some appeals to popularity as legitimate inferences. More importantly, the conditions for the application of Condorcet’s theorem (binary claim, competent judge, epistemic independence) can be used as critical tools when evaluating appeals to popularity
-
The Appraisal of Conductions Informal Logic (IF 0.9) Pub Date : 2019-06-05 Lilian Bermejo-Luque
I argue that conductions are a special type of inference indeed, but that this does not mean that we need to develop novel standards of inference goodness or specific argument schemes for properly assessing them. Following LNMA’s theoretical framework, I provide a semantic account of conductions and explain the interesting pragmatic properties of a certain type of conductions (i.e., balance of considerations
-
A Dialectical View on Conduction: Reasons, Warrants, and Normal Suasory Inclinations Informal Logic (IF 0.9) Pub Date : 2019-03-15 Shiyang Yu, Frank Zenker
When Carl Wellman (1971) introduced the reasoning-type conduction, he endorsed a dialectical view on natural language argumentation. Contemporary scholarship, by contrast, treats conductive argument predominantly on a product view. Not only did Wellman’s reasons for a dialectical view thus fall into disregard; a product-treatment of conduction also flouts the standard semantics of ‘argument’. Attempting
-
You Will Respect My Authoritah!? A Reply to Botting Informal Logic (IF 0.9) Pub Date : 2019-03-15 Moti Mizrahi
In a paper (Mizrahi 2013a) and a reply to critics (Mizrahi 2016a) 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 (defeasible) 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