The TRUE Test of Linkage

Authors

  • Mark Vorobej McMaster University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.22329/il.v16i3.2454

Keywords:

linked and convergent arguments, argument vulnerability, tinkering functions, zapped premise sets, logical support

Abstract

There are many radically different ways of understanding the distinction between linked and convergent arguments. This paper provides a generic model which enables one to articulate in a rigorous manner the important differences as well as the underlying similarities that exist between competing proposals. In addition, the paper offers a TRUE (Type Reduction Upon Elimination) test for distinguishing linked from convergent arguments which best captures the informal intuition that linked arguments are especially vulnerable to local criticisms pertaining to premise acceptability.

Author Biography

Mark Vorobej, McMaster University

I am an Associate Professor in the Department of Philosophy at McMaster University.

Downloads

Published

1994-01-01

Issue

Vol. 16 No. 3 (1994)

Section

Articles

License

Copyright for each article published in Informal Logic belongs to its author(s). Informal Logic has the right of first publication. Permission to reprint any article that appears in Informal Logic MUST be obtained in writing from the author(s). In addition to any form of acknowledgement required by the author(s), the following notice must be added to the statement of copyright permission made in the reprint (with the appropriate numbers replacing the ellipses): [Article Title] was originally published in Informal Logic, [year], Volume ..., Number ..., pp. ...-... .