David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Argumentation 16 (4):401-420 (2002)
This paper explores why respondents to a telephone public-opinion survey often give reasons for answering as they do, even though reason-giving is neither required nor encouraged and it is difficult to see the reasons as attempts to deal with disagreement. We find that respondents give reasons for the policy claims they make in their answers three times as frequently as they give reasons for value or factual claims, that their reasons tend to involve appeals to personal experience, and that they often talk about their thought processes, especially when the evidentiary stakes are high. We then explore several ways of explaining these findings. We suggest that one useful approach is to see the reason-giving in the survey interviews as deliberative, reflexive argumentation of the sort described as `critical thinking. We further suggest that the reason such argumentation is often conducted out loud in the interviews, rather than internally, is that it functions in the service of rhetorical ethos, in particular the need to display the fact that one is human, with human autonomy and agency. Doing this may be particularly important in contexts such as anonymous survey interviews in which people are at risk of being treated like machines
|Keywords||critical thinking deliberation ethos reason survey|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
David Enoch (2011). Giving Practical Reasons. Philosophers' Imprint 11 (4).
Derek Parfit (1997). Reasons and Motivation. Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 71 (1):99–130.
Herman E. Stark (2004). Reasons Without Principles. Inquiry 47 (2):143 – 167.
Kevin Vallier (2011). Against Public Reason Liberalism's Accessibility Requirement. Journal of Moral Philosophy 8 (3):366-389.
Lisa Bortolotti (2009). The Epistemic Benefits of Reason Giving. Theory and Psychology 19 (5):1-22.
Pamela Hieronymi (2011). Reasons for Action. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 111 (3pt3):407-427.
Hallvard Lillehammer (2010). Facts, Ends, and Normative Reasons. Journal of Ethics 14 (1):17 - 26.
Ulrike Heuer (2010). Reasons and Impossibility. Philosophical Studies 147 (2):235 - 246.
Thomas Scanlon (2007). Structural Irrationality. In Geoffrey Brennan, Robert Goodin, Frank Jackson & Michael Smith (eds.), Common Minds: Themes From the Philosophy of Philip Pettit. Clarendon Press.
Mathew Humphrey (2008). Environmentalism, Fairness, and Public Reasons. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 11 (2):177-192.
Micah Lott (2006). Restraint on Reasons and Reasons for Restraint: A Problem for Rawls' Ideal of Public Reason. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 87 (1):75–95.
Ralph Wedgwood (2009). Intrinsic Values and Reasons for Action. In Ernest Sosa & Enrique Villanueva (eds.), Metaethics. Wiley Periodicals, Inc.. 321-342.
Jason Marsh (2014). Conscientious Refusals and Reason‐Giving. Bioethics 28 (6):313-319.
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
Added to index2010-09-11
Total downloads3 ( #298,221 of 1,102,951 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #120,763 of 1,102,951 )
How can I increase my downloads?