Abstract
Premissary relevance is a property of arguments understood as speech act complexes. It is explicable in terms of the idea of a premise's lending support to a conclusion. Premissary relevance is a function of premises belonging to a set which authoritatively warrants an inference to a conclusion. An authoritative inference warrant will have associated with it a conditional proposition which is true— that is to say, which can be justified. The study of the Aristotelian doctrine of topoi or argument schemes may contribute to the task of identifying authoritative warrants.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Balir, J.A.: 1989, ‘Premise Relevance’, in R. Maier (ed.), Norms in Argumentation, Foris, Dordrecht, pp. 67–83.
Eemeren, F.H. van and R. Grootendorst: 1984, Speech Acts in Argumentative Discussions, Foris, Dordrecht.
Eemeren, F.H. van and T. Kruiger: 1987, ‘Identifying Argumentation Schemes’, in van Eemeren et al. (eds.), Argumentation: Perspectives and Approaches, Foris, Dordrecht, pp. 70–81.
Eemeren, F.H. van, R. Grootendorst, J.A. Blair, and C.A. Willard (eds.): 1987a, Argumentation: Across the Lines of Discipline, Foris, Dordrecht.
Eemeren, F.H. van et al.: 1987b, Argumentation: Perspectives and Approaches, Foris, Dordrecht.
Eemeren, F.H. van et al.: 1987c, Argumentation: Analyses and Practice, Foris, Dordrecht.
Freeman, J.B.: 1992, ‘Relevance, Warrants, Backing, Inductive Support’, Argumentation 6, 219–235.
Johnson, R.H. and Blair, J.A.: 1983, Logical Self-Defense, 2nd ed., McGraw-Hill Ryerson, Toronto.
Kienpointner, M.: 1987, ‘Towardsa Typology of Argumentative Schemes’, in van Eemeren et al. (eds.), Argumentation: Across the Lines of Discipline, Foris, Dordrecht, pp. 275–287.
Kienpointner, M.: 1991, ‘How to Classify Arguments’, in Proceedings of the 1990 ISSA Conference, SicSat, Amsterdam.
O'Keefe, D.J.: 1982, ‘The Concepts of Argument and Arguing’, in J.R. Cox and C.A. Willard (eds.), Advances in Argumentation Theory and Research, Southern Illinois University Press, Carbondale, pp. 3–23.
Schellens, P.J.: 1985, Redelijke argumenten: Een onderzoek naar normen voor kritische lezers, Foris, Dordrecht. (With summary in English.)
Schellens, P.J.: 1987, ‘Types of Argument and the Critical Reader’, in van Eemeren et al. (eds.), Argumentation: Analyses and Practices, Foris, Dordrecht, pp. 34–41.
Toulmin, S.E.: 1958, The Uses of Argument, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Walton, D.N.: 1982, Topical Relevance in Argumentation, John Benjamins, Amsterdam.
Walton, D.N.: 1989, Informal Logic, A Handbook for Critical Argumentation, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Blair, J.A. Premissary relevance. Argumentation 6, 203–217 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00154326
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00154326