9 found
George Boger [19]George K. Boger [1]
See also:
Profile: George Boger (Canisius College)
  1.  40
    George Boger (2005). Subordinating Truth–Is Acceptability Acceptable? Argumentation 19 (2):187-238.
    Argumentation logicians have recognized a specter of relativism to haunt their philosophy of argument. However, their attempts to dispel pernicious relativism by invoking notions of a universal audience or a community of model interlocutors have not been entirely successful. In fact, their various discussions of a universal audience invoke the context-eschewing formalism of Kant’s categorical imperative. Moreover, they embrace the Kantian method for resolving the antinomies that continually vacillates between opposing extremes – here between a transcendent universal audience and a (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
    Export citation  
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  2.  12
    George Boger (2004). Aristotle's Underlying Logic. In Dov M. Gabbay, John Woods & Akihiro Kanamori (eds.), Handbook of the History of Logic. Elsevier 1--101.
    Direct download  
    Export citation  
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  3.  4
    George Boger (2005). Mistakes in Reasoning About Argumentation. In John Woods, Kent A. Peacock & A. D. Irvine (eds.), Mistakes of Reason: Essays in Honour of John Woods. University of Toronto Press 702--742.
  4.  16
    George Boger (1998). Completion, Reduction and Analysis: Three Proof-Theoretic Processes in Aristotle'sprior Analytics. History and Philosophy of Logic 19 (4):187-226.
    Three distinctly different interpretations of Aristotle?s notion of a sullogismos in Prior Analytics can be traced: (1) a valid or invalid premise-conclusion argument (2) a single, logically true conditional proposition and (3) a cogent argumentation or deduction. Remarkably the three interpretations hold similar notions about the logical relationships among the sullogismoi. This is most apparent in their conflating three processes that Aristotle especially distinguishes: completion (A4-6)reduction(A7) and analysis (A45). Interpretive problems result from not sufficiently recognizing Aristotle?s remarkable degree of metalogical (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
    Export citation  
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  5.  13
    George Boger (2004). Aristotle on False Reasoning: Language and the World in the Sophistical Refutations. Informal Logic 23 (1).
    Direct download (13 more)  
    Export citation  
    My bibliography  
  6.  12
    George Boger (2002). Les Réfutations Sophistiques. Ancient Philosophy 22 (1):195-204.
  7.  5
    George Boger (2006). Humanist Principles Underlying Philosophy of Argument. Informal Logic 26 (2):149-174.
    This discussion reviews the thinking of some prominent philosophers of argument to extract principles common to their thinking. It shows that a growing concern with dialogical pragmatics is better appreciated as a part of applied ethics than of applied epistemology. The discussion concludes by indicating a possible consequence for philosophy of argument and invites further discussion by asking whether argumentation philosophy has an implicit, underlying moral, or even political, posture.
    Direct download (14 more)  
    Export citation  
    My bibliography  
  8.  16
    George Boger (1993). The Logical Sense of Παράδοξον in Aristotle's Sophistical Refutations. Ancient Philosophy 13 (1):55-78.
  9.  1
    George Boger (2010). Van Eemeren's Pondering on Problems of Argumentation. Informal Logic 30 (1):112-115.
    Direct download (13 more)  
    Export citation  
    My bibliography