207 found
Order:
  1. Maurice A. Finocchiaro (1990). Varieties of Rhetoric in Science. History of the Human Sciences 3 (2):177-193.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  2.  3
    Maurice A. Finocchiaro (1981). Current Periodical Articles. American Philosophical Quarterly 18 (1).
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   48 citations  
  3.  8
    Maurice A. Finocchiaro (2005). Arguments About Arguments: Systematic, Critical, and Historical Essays in Logical Theory. Cambridge University Press.
    Following an approach that is empirical but not psychological, and dialectical but not dialogical, Maurice Finocchiaro defines concepts such as reasoning, argument, argument analysis, critical reasoning, methodological reflection, judgment, critical thinking, and informal logic. Including extended critiques of the views of many contemporary scholars, he also integrates into the discussion Arnauld's Port-Royal Logic, Gramsci's theory of intellectuals, and case studies from the history of science, particularly the work of Galileo, Newton, Huygens, and Lavoisier.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   9 citations  
  4.  8
    Maurice A. Finocchiaro (2010). Defending Copernicus and Galileo. Review of Metaphysics 64 (1):75-103.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  5.  48
    Maurice A. Finocchiaro (1991). The Hermeneutics of Negative Evaluation, or a Hunt for the Red October. History of the Human Sciences 4 (1):161-167.
    One of the ideas elaborated in my recent book is what I called the hermeneutical\nprinciple of the asymmetry between negative and positive evaluation: ’this\nprescribes that the textual evidence needed to justify a negative, unfavourable\nevaluation must be of a high quality, strength, and rigor, whereas for a positive\nevaluation less exacting standards are sufficient’ (Finocchiaro, 1988: 247). There,\nI applied this principle to several cases, relating in one way or another to\nGramsci: some were his critiques of other authors, some were my own critiques\nof (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  6.  17
    Maurice A. Finocchiaro (1999). On Knowing. International Studies in Philosophy 31 (4):117-118.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  7.  12
    Maurice A. Finocchiaro (1979). Galileo's Early Notebooks: The Physical Questions. Journal of the History of Philosophy 17 (3):340-341.
  8.  11
    Maurice A. Finocchiaro (2013). Debts, Oligarchies, and Holisms: Deconstructing the Fallacy of Composition. Informal Logic 33 (2):143-174.
    This is a critical appreciation of Govier’s 2006 ISSA keynote address on the fallacy of composition, and of economists’ writings on this fallacy in economics. I argue that the “fallacy of composition” is a problematical concept, because it does not denote a distinctive kind of argument but rather a plurality, and does not constitute a distinctive kind of error, but rather reduces to oversimplification in arguing from micro to macro. Finally, I propose further testing of this claim based on examples (...)
    Direct download (13 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  9.  9
    Maurice A. Finocchiaro (1984). Guida Alla Letteratura Su Wittgenstein. Review of Metaphysics 38 (2):388-390.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  10. Maurice A. Finocchiaro, Commentary On: Andrew Aberdein's "Fallacy and Argumentational Vice".
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  11.  7
    Maurice A. Finocchiaro (1977). Fallacies. Journal of the History of Philosophy 15 (3):364-364.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  12.  7
    Maurice A. Finocchiaro (1977). The Uses of History in the Interpretation of Science. Review of Metaphysics 31 (1):93 - 107.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  13.  5
    Maurice A. Finocchiaro (2007). Arguments, Meta-Arguments, and Metadialogues: A Reconstruction of Krabbe, Govier, and Woods. [REVIEW] Argumentation 21 (3):253-268.
    Krabbe (2003, in F.H. van Eemeren, J.A. Blair, C.A. Willard and A.F. Snoeck Henkemans (eds.), Proceedings of the Fifth Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation, Sic Sat, Amsterdam, pp. 641–644) defined a metadialogue as a dialogue about one or more dialogues, and a ground-level dialogue as a dialogue that is not a metadialogue. Similarly, I define a meta-argument as an argument about one or more arguments, and a ground-level argument as one which is not a meta-argument. (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  14.  12
    Maurice A. Finocchiaro (2003). Physical-Mathematical Reasoning: Galileo on the Extruding Power of Terrestrial Rotation. Synthese 134 (1-2):217 - 244.
    No categories
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  15.  15
    Maurice A. Finocchiaro (1988). Gramsci and the History of Dialectical Thought. Cambridge University Press.
    This is an interpretative and evaluative study of the thought of Antonio Gramsci, the founding father of the Italian Communist Party who died in 1937 after ten years of imprisonment in Fascist jails. It proceeds by a rigorous textual analysis of his Prison Notebooks, the scattered notes he wrote during his incarceration. Professor Finocchiaro explores the nature of Gramsci's dialectical thinking, in order to show in what ways Gramsci was and was not a Marxist, as well as to illustrate correspondences (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  16. Maurice A. Finocchiaro (1982). Galileo and the Art of Reasoning: Rhetorical Foundations of Logic and Scientific Method. Philosophy and Rhetoric 15 (2):134-135.
    No categories
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   8 citations  
  17.  2
    Maurice A. Finocchiaro (2010). Defending Copernicus and Galileo: Critical Reasoning and the Ship Experiment Argument. Review of Metaphysics 64 (1):75-103.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  18.  53
    M. Finocchiaro (1996). Review: Job Kozhamthadam, S. J. The Discovery of Kepler's Laws: The Interaction of Science, Philosophy, and Religion. [REVIEW] British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 47 (2):325-327.
  19. Maurice A. Finocchiaro (2005). Retrying Galileo, 1633-1992. Monograph Collection (Matt - Pseudo).
    No categories
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  20.  46
    Maurice Finocchiaro (1979). Science and Praxis in Gramsci's Critique of Bukharin. Philosophy and Social Criticism 6 (1):26-56.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  21. Maurice A. Finocchiaro (1979). History of Science as Explanation. Erkenntnis 14 (1):93-102.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   5 citations  
  22.  4
    Maurice A. Finocchiaro (1981). Fallacies and the Evaluation of Reasoning. American Philosophical Quarterly 18 (1):13 - 22.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  23.  6
    Maurice A. Finocchiaro (1996). Critical Thinking, Critical Reasoning, and Methodological Reflection. Inquiry 15 (4):66-79.
    No categories
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  24. Maurice A. Finocchiaro (1992). To Save the Phenomena: Duhem on Galileo. Revue Internationale de Philosophie 46 (182):291-310.
    No categories
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  25.  16
    Maurice A. Finocchiaro (2002). Galileo as a 'Bad Theologian': A Formative Myth About Galileo's Trial. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 33 (4):753-791.
    For 150 years after Galileo’s condemnation in 1633, there were many references to the trial, but no sustained, heated or polarized discussions. Then came the thesis that Galileo was condemned not for being a good astronomer but for being a bad theologian ; it began in 1784–1785 with an apology of the Inquisition by Mallet du Pan in the Mercure de France and the printing in Tiraboschi’s Storia della letteratura italiana of an apocryphal letter attributed to Galileo but forged by (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  26.  45
    Maurice A. Finocchiaro (1981). Newton on Matter and Activity. Journal of the History of Philosophy 19 (4):507-510.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  27.  33
    Maurice A. Finocchiaro (1997). The Port-Royal Logic's Theory of Argument. Argumentation 11 (4):393-410.
    This is a critical examination of Antoine Arnauld's Logic or the Art of Thinking (1662), commonly known as the Port-Royal Logic. Rather than reading this work from the viewpoint of post-Fregean formal logic or the viewpoint of seventeenth-century intellectual history, I approach it with the aim of exploring its relationship to that contemporary field which may be labeled informal logic and/or argumentation theory. It turns out that the Port-Royal Logic is a precursor of this current field, or conversely, that this (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  28. Job Kozhamthadam & Maurice A. Finocchiaro (1996). The Discovery of Kepler's Laws: The Interaction of Science, Philosophy, and Religion. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 47 (2):325-327.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  29.  12
    Maurice A. Finocchiaro (2014). John Woods: Errors of Reasoning: Naturalizing the Logic of Inference (Studies in Logic, Vol. 45). Argumentation 28 (2):231-239.
    1As an editor of this journal, John Woods and his distinguished contributions to logic, reasoning, and argumentation need little introduction. However, this book is partly a fruit of his relatively recent collaboration with Dov Gabbay, which deserves some elaboration. They have co-edited some monumental reference collections, e.g.: Handbook of the Logic of Argument and Inference: The Turn toward the Practical and Logic: A History of Its Central Concepts. And they are co-authoring an ambitious multi-volume work collectively entitled A (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  30.  9
    Maurice A. Finocchiaro (2004). Dialectics, Evaluation, and Argument. Informal Logic 23 (1).
    A critical examination of the dialectical approach, focusing on a comparison ofthe illative and the dialectical definitions of argument. I distinguish a moderate, a strong and a hyper dialectical conception of argument. I critique Goldman's argument for the moderate conception and Johnson's argument for the strong conception, and argue that the moderate conception is correct.
    Direct download (16 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  31.  2
    Maurice A. Finocchiaro (2002). Drake on Galileo. Annals of Science 59 (1):83-88.
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  32.  12
    Maurice A. Finocchiaro (2009). Galileo's Inquisition Trial Revisited. Early Science and Medicine 14 (4):576-578.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  33. Maurice Finocchiaro, Agnese Grieco & Monica Ruschetta Randi (1992). Gramsci Critico E la Critica. Studies in Soviet Thought 43 (1):37-39.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  34.  2
    Maurice Finocchiaro (1995). A Defense Of Galileo, The Mathematician From Florence: Which Is An Inquiry As To Whether The Philosophical View Advocated By Galileo Is In Agreement With, Or Is Opposed To, The Sacred Scriptures By Thomas Campanella; Richard J. Blackwell. [REVIEW] Isis: A Journal of the History of Science 86:108-109.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  35.  2
    Maurice A. Finocchiaro, Meta-Argumentation in Hume’s Critique of the Design Argument.
    Although Hume’s critique of the design argument is a powerful non-inductive meta-argument, the main line of critical reasoning is not analogical but rather a complex meta-argument. It consists of two parts, one interpretive, the other evaluative. The critical meta-argument advances twelve criticisms: that the design argument is weak because two of its three premises are justified by inadequate subarguments; because its main inference embodies four flaws; and because the conclusion is in itself problematic for four reasons. Such complexity is quite (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  36.  8
    Maurice A. Finocchiaro (1994). Methodological Judgment and Critical Reasoning in Galileo's Dialogue. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1994:248 - 257.
    Galileo's Dialogue (1632) can be read from the viewpoints of methodological judgment and critical reasoning; methodological judgment means the avoidance of onesidedness and extremes; and critical reasoning means reasoning aimed at the analysis and evaluation of arguments. Classic sources for these readings are Thomas Salusbury (1661) and the Port-Royal logicians (1662). This focus does not deny the book's scientific, historical, rhetorical, and aesthetic dimensions; it is critical of excessively rhetorical readings; and it suggests solutions to the problems of hermeneutical pluralism, (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  37.  2
    Maurice A. Finocchiaro (1980). Philosophical Theory and Scientific Practice in Bukharin's Sociology. Studies in East European Thought 21 (2):141-174.
  38.  7
    Maurice A. Finocchiaro (1975). Cause, Explanation, and Understanding in Science: Galileo's Case. Review of Metaphysics 29 (1):117 - 128.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  39.  6
    Maurice A. Finocchiaro (1987). Six Types of Fallaciousness: Toward a Realistic Theory of Logical Criticism. [REVIEW] Argumentation 1 (3):263-282.
    I begin by formulating the problem of the nature of fallacy in terms of the logic of the negative evaluation of argument, that is, in terms of a theory of logical criticism; here I discuss several features of my approach and several advantages vis-à-vis other approaches; a main feature of my approach is the concern to avoid both formalist and empiricist excesses. I then define six types of fallaciousness, labeled formal, explanatory, presuppositional, positive, semantical, and persuasive; they all involve arguments (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  40.  3
    Maurice A. Finocchiaro (2009). Eugene Garver, For the Sake of Argument: Practical Reasoning, Character, and the Ethics of Belief. [REVIEW] Argumentation 23 (1):109-114.
  41.  1
    Maurice A. Finocchiaro (1999). The Galileo Affair From John Milton to John Paul II: Problems and Prospects. Science and Education 8 (2):189-209.
  42.  7
    Maurice A. Finocchiaro (1975). Il pensiero filosofico e scientifico di Antoine Arnauld. Journal of the History of Philosophy 13 (4):529-529.
    Translate
      Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  43.  6
    Tom Rockmore, John D. Windhausen, Maurice A. Finocchiaro, Irving H. Anellis & Heinrich Bortis (1987). Reviews. [REVIEW] Studies in East European Thought 33 (4):265-267.
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  44.  1
    Maurice A. Finocchiaro (1981). Remarks on Truth, Problem-Solving, and Methodology. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 12 (3):261-268.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  45.  2
    Maurice A. Finocchiaro (1994). Two Empirical Approaches to the Study of Reasoning. Informal Logic 16 (1).
    David N. Perkins has studied everyday reasoning by an experimental-critical approach involving taped interviews during which subjects reflect on controversial issues and articulate their reasoning on both sides. The present author has studied scientific reasoning in natural language by an historical-textual approach involving the reconstruction and evaluation of the arguments in Galileo's Two Chief World Systems. They have, independently, reached the strikingly similar substantive conclusion that the most common flaw of informal reasoning is the failure to consider lines of argument (...)
    Direct download (13 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  46.  2
    Maurice A. Finocchiaro (1977). Logic and Rhetoric in Lavoisier's Sealed Note: Toward a Rhetoric of Science. Philosophy and Rhetoric 10 (2):111 - 122.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  47.  4
    M. A. Finocchiaro (1982). Revolutionary Humanism and Historicism in Modern Italy. Télos 1982 (51):234-236.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  48.  8
    Maurice A. Finocchiaro (1978). Rhetoric and Scientific Rationality. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1978:235 - 246.
    Feyerabend's views are construed as formulating the problem of determining the role of rhetoric in scientific rationality and posing the solution-theory that scientific rationality is essentially rhetorical. He is taken to give three arguments against reason, of which the one from the insufficiency of reason and the one from incommensurability are shown to presuppose his historical argument; his historical argument is based on his account of Galileo, which hinges essentially on Feyerabend's analysis of the tower argument. This analysis is insightful (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  49.  10
    Maurice A. Finocchiaro (1979). The Psychological Explanation of Reasoning: Logical and Methodological Problems. Philosophy of the Social Sciences 9 (3):277-291.
  50.  7
    Maurice A. Finocchiaro (1985). Aspects of the Logic of History-of-Science Explanation. Synthese 62 (3):429 - 454.
    The topic of history-of-science explanation is first briefly introduced as a generally important one for the light it may shed on action theory, on the logic of discovery, and on philosophy''s relations with historiography of science, intellectual history, and the sociology of knowledge. Then some problems and some conclusions are formulated by reference to some recent relevant literature: a critical analysis of Laudan''s views on the role of normative evaluations in rational explanations occasions the result that one must make aconceptual (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
1 — 50 / 207