David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Teaching Philosophy 29 (2):157-172 (2006)
Following the argument wherever it leads is a piece of well-known and time-honored advice we give to students in philosophy. Using three instances drawn from the history of philosophy, we look at reasons for both adhering to this principle and for sometimes putting it aside in favor of other considerations. We find that the requirement of following the argument where it leads is not a simple demand of logic, but rather a complex norm that is sensitive to various considerations. Some of these have to do with the fact that consistency may be restored to one’s system of beliefs only at a price that one may judge, on cognitive or moral grounds, as too high. Following the argument wherever it leads is thus a norm about the place of reason in our intellectual and practical lives and is therefore a norm that must be evaluated in the context of various extra-logical considerations
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|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
Thomas Kelly (2011). Following the Argument Where It Leads. Philosophical Studies 154 (1):105-124.
Danny Frederick (2009). To Follow the Argument Wherever It Leads. The Reasoner 3 (11):5-6.
Maralee Harrell (2012). Assessing the Efficacy of Argument Diagramming to Teach Critical Thinking Skills in Introduction to Philosophy. Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines 27 (2):31-39.
Asbjørn Steglich-Petersen (2013). The No Guidance Argument. Theoria 79 (1):279-283.
Brad Hooker (1992). Parfit's Arguments for the Present-Aim Theory. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 70 (1):61 – 75.
C. Grant Luckhardt (1994). How to Do Things with Logic. L. Erlbaum Associates.
John M. DePoe (2011). Defeating the Self-Defeat Argument for Phenomenal Conservativism. Philosophical Studies 152 (3):347-359.
Tracy Lupher (2012). A Logical Choice. Southwest Philosophy Review 28 (1):237-246.
Luca Incurvati & Julien Murzi (2008). How Basic is the Basic Revisionary Argument? Analysis 68 (4):303-309.
S. Marc Cohen & David Keyt (1992). Analyzing Plato's Arguments: Plato and Platonism. In J. Klagge & N. Smith (eds.), Methods of Interpreting Plato and his Dialogues. Oxford University Press
Clinton Golding (2008). The Philosophy Teacher as Guide. Proceedings of the Xxii World Congress of Philosophy 27:29-37.
Neil Levy (2000). Charles Taylor on Overcoming Incommensurability. Philosophy and Social Criticism 26 (5):47-61.
Carmichael Peters (1998). On Teaching Karl Rahner to Undergraduates. Philosophy and Theology 11 (1):207-217.
Ulrike Hahn & Mike Oaksford (2006). A Bayesian Approach to Informal Argument Fallacies. Synthese 152 (2):207 - 236.
Added to index2011-01-09
Total downloads11 ( #308,022 of 1,796,218 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #349,835 of 1,796,218 )
How can I increase my downloads?