Search results for 'invalidity of arguments' (try it on Scholar)

1000+ found
Sort by:
  1. Susanne Bobzien (1999). Logic: The Stoics (Part One). In Keimpe Algra & et al (eds.), The Cambridge History of Hellenistic Philosophy. Cambridge University Press.score: 82.0
    ABSTRACT: A detailed presentation of Stoic logic, part one, including their theories of propositions (or assertibles, Greek: axiomata), demonstratives, temporal truth, simple propositions, non-simple propositions(conjunction, disjunction, conditional), quantified propositions, logical truths, modal logic, and general theory of arguments (including definition, validity, soundness, classification of invalid arguments).
    Translate to English
    | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Maurice A. Finocchiaro (2007). Arguments, Meta-Arguments, and Metadialogues: A Reconstruction of Krabbe, Govier, and Woods. [REVIEW] Argumentation 21 (3):253-268.score: 78.0
    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 (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Moti Mizrahi (2011). A Pedagogical Challenge in Teaching Arguments for the Existence of God. APA Newsletter on Teaching Philosophy 11 (1):10-12.score: 72.0
    In this paper, I describe the way in which I introduce arguments for the existence of God to undergraduate students in Introduction to Philosophy.
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Marcin Selinger (forthcoming). Towards Formal Representation and Evaluation of Arguments. Argumentation:1-15.score: 70.3
    The aim of this paper is to propose foundations for a formal model of representation and numerical evaluation of a possibly broad class of arguments, including those that occur in natural discourse. Since one of the most characteristic features of everyday argumentation is the occurrence of convergent reasoning, special attention should be paid to the operation ⊕, which allows us to calculate the logical force of convergent arguments with an accuracy not offered by other approaches.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Vadim Verenich (2012). Charles Sanders Peirce, A Mastermind of (Legal) Arguments. International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue Internationale de Sémiotique Juridique 25 (1):31-55.score: 65.0
    In this article, we try to trace the relationship between semiotics and theory of legal reasoning using Peirce’s idea that all reasoning must be necessarily in signs: every act of reasoning/argumentation is a sign process, leading to “the growth of knowledge. The broad scope and universal character of Peirce’s sign theory of reasoning allows us to look for new conciliatory paradigms, which must be presented in terms of possible synthesis between the traditional approaches to argumentation. These traditional approaches are strongly (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Birgit Kellner (2011). Self-Awareness (Svasaṃvedana) and Infinite Regresses: A Comparison of Arguments by Dignāga and Dharmakīrti. [REVIEW] Journal of Indian Philosophy 39 (4-5):411-426.score: 63.0
    This paper compares and contrasts two infinite regress arguments against higher-order theories of consciousness that were put forward by the Buddhist epistemologists Dignāga (ca. 480–540 CE) and Dharmakīrti (ca. 600–660). The two arguments differ considerably from each other, and they also differ from the infinite regress argument that scholars usually attribute to Dignāga or his followers. The analysis shows that the two philosophers, in these arguments, work with different assumptions for why an object-cognition must be cognised: for (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Lev G. Vassiliev (2003). Rational Comprehension of Arguments in Theoretical Texts: A Program for an Argumentative-Linguistic Approach. [REVIEW] Argumentation 17 (1):21-34.score: 63.0
    A method of linguistically-oriented reasoning comprehension is proposed. It is based on semiological principles of text comprehension. Both content and form are essential for comprehending argumentative texts. A text recipient is viewed as a rational judge trying to detect all the components of the argument he/she considers and thus to see if the argument is consistent. Elementary and higher level argumentative units of the text are discovered by applying a modified S. Toulmin's model of argumentative functions. Validity and correctness of (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. James F. Voss, Rebecca Fincher-Kiefer, Jennifer Wiley & Laurie Ney Silfies (1993). On the Processing of Arguments. Argumentation 7 (2):165-181.score: 61.7
    This paper is concerned with the processing of informal arguments, that is, arguments involving “probable truth.” A model of informal argument processing is presented that is based upon Hample's (1977) expansion of Toulmin's (1958) model of argument structure. The model postulates that a claim activates an attitude, the two components forming a complex that in turn activates reasons. Furthermore, the model holds occurrence of the reason, or possibly the claim and the reason, activates values. Three experiments are described (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Carole Blair, V. Balthrop & Neil Michel (2011). The Arguments of the Tombs of the Unknown: Relationality and National Legitimation. [REVIEW] Argumentation 25 (4):449-468.score: 61.0
    In the wake of the First World War, a new form of commemoration emerged internationally, but in each case focused upon a new kind of national “hero”—the unknown soldier or warrior. The first instances appeared in France and Britain in 1920, followed by the United States in 1921, and Belgium in 1922. Other nations followed suit over the years, with the most recent WWI Unknown Soldier monument dedicated in 2004, in New Zealand. The motivational calculus of these national tombs was, (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. Daniel Howard-Snyder & John Hawthorne (1994). On the a Priori Rejection of Evidential Arguments From Evil. Sophia:33-47.score: 60.0
    Recent work on the evidential argument from evil offers us sundry considerations which are intended to weigh against this form of atheological arguments. By far the most provocative is that on a priori grounds alone, evil can be shown to be evidentially impotent. This astonishing thesis has been given a vigorous defense by Keith Yandell. In this paper, we shall measure the prospects for an a priori dismissal of evidential arguments from evil.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. Martin Lin (2007). Spinoza's Arguments for the Existence of God. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 75 (2):269-297.score: 60.0
    It is often thought that, although <span class='Hi'>Spinoza</span> develops a bold and distinctive conception of God (the unique substance, or Natura Naturans, in which all else inheres and which possesses infinitely many attributes, including extension), the arguments that he offers which purport to prove God’s existence contribute nothing new to natural theology. Rather, he is seen as just another participant in the seventeenthcentury revival of the ontological argument initiated by Descartes and taken up by Malebranche and Leibniz among others. (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. Benjamin James Fraser (2014). Evolutionary Debunking Arguments and the Reliability of Moral Cognition. Philosophical Studies 168 (2):457-473.score: 60.0
    Recent debate in metaethics over evolutionary debunking arguments against morality has shown a tendency to abstract away from relevant empirical detail. Here, I engage the debate about Darwinian debunking of morality with relevant empirical issues. I present four conditions that must be met in order for it to be reasonable to expect an evolved cognitive faculty to be reliable: the environment, information, error, and tracking conditions. I then argue that these conditions are not met in the case of our (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. Stephen Laurence & Eric Margolis (1997). Regress Arguments Against the Language of Thought. Analysis 57 (1):60-66.score: 60.0
    The Language of Thought Hypothesis is often taken to have the fatal flaw that it generates an explanatory regress. The language of thought is invoked to explain certain features of natural language (e.g., that it is learned, understood, and is meaningful), but, according to the regress argument, the language of thought itself has these same features and hence no explanatory progress has been made. We argue that such arguments rely on the tacit assumption that the entire motivation for the (...)
    Direct download (12 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. Leo Groarke (2002). Johnson on the Metaphysics of Argument. Argumentation 16 (3):277-286.score: 59.0
    This paper responds to two aspects of Ralph Johnson's Manifest Rationality (2000). The first is his critique of deductivism. The second is his failure to make room for some species of argument (e.g., visual and kisceral arguments) proposed by recent commentators. In the first case, Johnson holds that argumentation theorists have adopted a notion of argument which is too narrow. In the second, that they have adopted one which is too broad. I discuss the case Johnson makes for both (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. Sonja J. Ellis (2002). Moral Reasoning and Homosexuality: The Acceptability of Arguments About Lesbian and Gay Issues. Journal of Moral Education 31 (4):455-467.score: 57.0
    In the political arena, lesbian and gay issues have been contested typically on grounds of human rights, but with variable success. Using a moral developmental framework, the purpose of this study was to explore preferences for different types of moral arguments when thinking about moral dilemmas around lesbian and gay issues. The analysis presented here comprised data collected from 545 students at UK universities who completed a questionnaire, part of which comprised a moral dilemma task. Findings of the study (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  16. Matthew Inglis & Juan Pablo Mejía-Ramos (2009). On the Persuasiveness of Visual Arguments in Mathematics. Foundations of Science 14 (1-2):97-110.score: 57.0
    Two experiments are reported which investigate the factors that influence how persuaded mathematicians are by visual arguments. We demonstrate that if a visual argument is accompanied by a passage of text which describes the image, both research-active mathematicians and successful undergraduate mathematics students perceive it to be significantly more persuasive than if no text is given. We suggest that mathematicians’ epistemological concerns about supporting a claim using visual images are less prominent when the image is described in words. Finally (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  17. J. Katzav & C. A. Reed (2004). On Argumentation Schemes and the Natural Classification of Arguments. Argumentation 18 (2):239-259.score: 57.0
    We develop conceptions of arguments and of argument types that will, by serving as the basis for developing a natural classification of arguments, benefit work in artificial intelligence. Focusing only on arguments construed as the semantic entities that are the outcome of processes of reasoning, we outline and clarify our view that an argument is a proposition that represents a fact as both conveying some other fact and as doing so wholly. Further, we outline our view that, (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  18. John-Michael Kuczynski (2006). THE ANALOGUE-DIGITAL DISTINCTION AND THE COGENCY OF KANT'S TRANSCENDENTAL ARGUMENTS. Existentia: An International Journal of Philosophy:279-320.score: 57.0
    Hume's attempt to show that deduction is the only legitimate form of inference presupposes that enumerative induction is the only non-deductive form of inference. In actuality, enumerative induction is not even a form of inference: all supposed cases of enumerative induction are disguised cases of Inference to the Best Explanation (IBE), so far as they aren't simply cases of mentation of a purely associative kind and, consequently, of a kind that is non-inductive and otherwise non-inferential. The justification for IBE lies (...)
    No categories
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  19. Nghia Chi Nguyen (2013). Examination of Existing Arguments on Business Oriented Towards Poverty Reduction with the Case of People with Disabilities in Vietnam. Asian Journal of Business Ethics 2 (2):147-161.score: 57.0
    With an eye ultimately to answering the question of how business can alleviate poverty completely, the paper examines existing arguments about the approach of business to poverty reduction with the case of people with disabilities living in poverty in Vietnam. The paper suggests that business should take the knowledge and potential of poor people into consideration in its interfaces with different types of poor people: consumers, workers, property owners, etc. Furthermore, investigating how business can help reduce poverty while still (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  20. Bianca Bernardi & Emanuela Antolini (1996). Structural Differences in the Production of Written Arguments. Argumentation 10 (2):175-196.score: 57.0
    The purpose of this study is to analyse the structure of written argumentative texts produced by pupils in grades 3, 5, 7 and 11 in relation to three different tasks: Group A — subjects are assigned a topic question consisting of a single statement (open question); Group B — subjects are given a topic question consisting of both a statement and its opposite (opposite opinions); Group C — subjects are given an initial and a final sentence of a text, which (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  21. Manfred Hofer & Birgit Pikowsky (1993). Validation of a Category System for Arguments in Conflict Discourse. Argumentation 7 (2):135-148.score: 57.0
    Theories of individuation predict systematic differences in argumentative behavior between adolescent girls and their mothers. In order to reveal the nature and functions of this kind of discourse, two studies were carried out on 110 mother-daughter pairs. The second study (n=80) replicated and extended the first study (n=30) on an independent sample. The mother-daughter pairs were asked to discuss a subject that had recently been at issue between them. To assess the argumentative behavior, a category system was developed that reflects (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  22. Adrian Paul Iliescu (2010). The Autonomy of Morals. Two Analytic Arguments. Journal for the Study of Religions and Ideologies 9 (26):3-17.score: 57.0
    The theist thesis that any true ethics must be a religious one is criticized from two different angles; it is shown that: (i) in order to avoid divine voluntarism, theism uses a supposition the acceptance of which makes arguments against autonomous ethics un- acceptable, for they inevitably beg the question; (ii) it assumes a kind of moral foun- dationalism which is, according to some Wittgensteinean arguments, utterly superfluous; the idea that any authoritative ethics needs the absolute authority of (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  23. Andrada Parvu, Gabriel Roman, Silvia Dumitras, Rodica Gramma, Mariana Enache, Stefana Maria Moisa, Radu Chirita, Catalin Iov & Beatrice Ioan (2012). Arguments in Favor of a Religious Coping Pattern in Terminally Ill Patients. Journal for the Study of Religions and Ideologies 11 (31):88-112.score: 57.0
    A patient suffering from a severe illness that is entering its terminal stage is forced to develop a coping process. Of all the coping patterns, the religious one stands out as being a psychological resource available to all patients regardless of culture, learning, and any age. Religious coping interacts with other values or practices of society, for example the model of a society that takes care of it's elder members among family or in an institutionalized environment or the way the (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  24. David Goodwin (1992). The Dialectic of Second-Order Distinctions: The Structure of Arguments About Fallacies. Informal Logic 14 (1).score: 56.7
    Arguments about fallacies generally attempt to distinguish real from apparent modes of argumentation and reasoning. To examine the structure of these arguments, this paper develops a theory of dialectical distinction. First, it explores the connection between Nicholas Rescher's concept of distinction as a "dialectical countermove" and Chaim Perelman and L. Olbrecht-Tyteca's "dissociation of ideas." Next, it applies a theory of distinction to Aristotle's extended arguments about fallacies in De Sophisticis Elenchis, primarily with a view to analyzing its (...)
    Direct download (13 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  25. Andrew R. Bailey, The Unsoundness of Arguments From Conceivability.score: 56.0
    It is widely suspected that arguments from conceivability, at least in some of their more notorious instances, are unsound. However, the reasons for the failure of conceivability arguments are less well agreed upon, and it remains unclear how to distinguish between sound and unsound instances of the form. In this paper I provide an analysis of the form of arguments from conceivability, and use this analysis to diagnose a systematic weakness in the argument form which reveals all (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  26. Floris J. Bex, Peter J. van Koppen, Henry Prakken & Bart Verheij (2010). A Hybrid Formal Theory of Arguments, Stories and Criminal Evidence. Artificial Intelligence and Law 18 (2):123-152.score: 56.0
    This paper presents a theory of reasoning with evidence in order to determine the facts in a criminal case. The focus is on the process of proof, in which the facts of the case are determined, rather than on related legal issues, such as the admissibility of evidence. In the literature, two approaches to reasoning with evidence can be distinguished, one argument-based and one story-based. In an argument-based approach to reasoning with evidence, the reasons for and against the occurrence of (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  27. Marilyn Ford (2005). Human Nonmonotonic Reasoning: The Importance of Seeing the Logical Strength of Arguments. Synthese 146 (1-2):71 - 92.score: 56.0
    Three studies of human nonmonotonic reasoning are described. The results show that people find such reasoning quite difficult, although being given problems with known subclass-superclass relationships is helpful. The results also show that recognizing differences in the logical strengths of arguments is important for the nonmonotonic problems studied. For some of these problems, specificity – which is traditionally considered paramount in drawing appropriate conclusions – was irrelevant and so should have lead to a “can’t tell” response; however, people could (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  28. Scott Brewer, Logocratic Method and the Analysis of Arguments in Evidence.score: 56.0
    Legal analysis is dominated by legal arguments, and the assessment of any legal claim requires the assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of those arguments. The ‘logocratic’ method is a systematic method for assessing the strengths and weaknesses of arguments. More specifically, it is a method designed to help the analyst determine what degree of warrant the premises of an argument provide for its conclusion. Although the method is applicable to any type of argument, this essay focuses (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  29. Ronald P. Endicott (2012). Resolving Arguments by Different Conceptual Traditions of Realization. Philosophical Studies 159 (1):41-59.score: 54.0
    There is currently a significant amount of interest in understanding and developing theories of realization. Naturally arguments have arisen about the adequacy of some theories over others. Many of these arguments have a point. But some can be resolved by seeing that the theories of realization in question are not genuine competitors because they fall under different conceptual traditions with different but compatible goals. I will first describe three different conceptual traditions of realization that are implicated by the (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  30. Robert Stern (2000). Transcendental Arguments and Scepticism: Answering the Question of Justification. Oxford University Press.score: 54.0
    Robert Stern investigates how scepticism can be countered by using transcendental arguments concerning the necessary conditions for the possibility of experience, language, or thought. He shows that the most damaging sceptical questions concern neither the certainty of our beliefs nor the reliability of our belief-forming methods, but rather how we can justify our beliefs.
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  31. Ariela Tubert (2011). Korsgaard's Constitutive Arguments and the Principles of Practical Reason. Philosophical Quarterly 61 (243):343-362.score: 54.0
    Constitutive arguments for the principles of practical reason attempt to justify normative requirements by claiming that we already accept them in so far as we are believers or agents. In two constitutive arguments for the requirement that we must will universally, Korsgaard attempts first to arrive at the requirement that we will universally from observations about the causality of the will, and secondly to establish that willing universally is constitutive of having a self. Some rational requirements may be (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  32. James Williams (2010). Immanence and Transcendence as Inseparable Processes: On the Relevance of Arguments From Whitehead to Deleuze Interpretation. Deleuze Studies 4 (1):94-106.score: 54.0
    It is argued in this paper that recent work on immanence and transcendence in Whitehead scholarship, notably by Basile and Nobo, provides helpful guidelines and ideas for work on problems regarding immanence in Deleuze's philosophy. By following arguments on theism and naturalism in the reception of Whitehead, it argues that Deleuze's philosophy depends on reciprocal relations between that actual and the virtual such that they cannot be considered as separate without also being incomplete. It is then shown that Deleuze's (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  33. Atsushi Asai, Yasuhiro Kadooka & Kuniko Aizawa (2010). Arguments Against Promoting Organ Transplants From Brain-Dead Donors, and Views of Contemporary Japanese on Life and Death. Bioethics 26 (4):215-223.score: 54.0
    As of 2009, the number of donors in Japan is the lowest among developed countries. On July 13, 2009, Japan's Organ Transplant Law was revised for the first time in 12 years. The revised and old laws differ greatly on four primary points: the definition of death, age requirements for donors, requirements for brain-death determination and organ extraction, and the appropriateness of priority transplants for relatives.In the four months of deliberations in the National Diet before the new law was established, (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  34. Pekka Väyrynen (2004). Review of Christian Illies, The Grounds of Ethical Judgement: New Transcendental Arguments in Moral Philosophy. [REVIEW] Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews 2004 (3).score: 54.0
    This is a review of Christian Illies: The Grounds of Ethical Judgement: New Transcendental Arguments in Moral Philosophy (Clarendon Press, 2003).
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  35. Rudi A. Te Velde (2003). ‘The First Thing to Know About God’: Kretzmann and Aquinas on the Meaning and Necessity of Arguments for the Existence of God. Religious Studies 39 (3):251-267.score: 54.0
    This paper examines critically Kretzmann's reconstruction of the project of natural theology as exemplified by Aquinas's Summa Contra Gentiles. It is argued that the notion of natural theology, as understood and advocated by Kretzmann, is particularly indebted to the epistemologically biased natural theology of modernity with its focus on rational justification of theistic belief. As a consequence, Kretzmann's view of the arguments for the existence of God and their place within Aquinas's theological project is insufficiently sensitive to the ontological (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  36. Stephen Boulter (2011). The Medieval Origins of Conceivability Arguments. Metaphilosophy 42 (5):617-641.score: 54.0
    The central recommendation of this article is that philosophers trained in the analytic tradition ought to add the sensibilities and skills of the historian to their methodological toolkit. The value of an historical approach to strictly philosophical matters is illustrated by a case study focussing on the medieval origin of conceivability arguments and contemporary views of modality. It is shown that common metaphilosophical views about the nature of the philosophical enterprise as well as certain inference patterns found in thinkers (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  37. Johnny Hartz Søraker (2006). The Role of Pragmatic Arguments in Computer Ethics. Ethics and Information Technology 8 (3):121-130.score: 54.0
    The purpose of this paper is to stress the importance of pragmatic arguments if we are to reach overlapping consensuses across cultural and disciplinary borders. An analytical distinction is made between, on the one hand, arguments based on socio-political or philosophical presuppositions, and on the other hand, pragmatic arguments. The latter are (as far as possible) detached from culture-specific or disciplinary presuppositions. I will mainly focus on the issue of regulation and surveillance on the Internet, (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  38. Wim J. Steen (1983). Methodological Problems in Evolutionary Biology II. Appraisal of Arguments Against Adaptationism. Acta Biotheoretica 32 (3).score: 54.0
    Methodological analysis shows that the concepts of fitness and adaptation are more complex than the literature suggests. Various arguments against adaptationism are inadequate since they are couched in terms of unduly simplistic notions.
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  39. Fábio Perin Shecaira (2013). Analogical Arguments in Ethics and Law: A Defence of Deductivism. Informal Logic 33 (3):406-437.score: 54.0
    The paper provides a qualified defence of Bruce Waller’s deductivist schema for a priori analogical arguments in ethics and law. One crucial qualification is that the schema represents analogical arguments as complexes composed of one deductive inference (hence “deductivism”) but also of one non-deductive subargument. Another important qualification is that the schema is informed by normative assumptions regarding the conditions that an analogical argument must satisfy in order for it to count as an optimal instance of its kind. (...)
    Direct download (17 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  40. Anthony G. Tuckett (2004). Truth-Telling in Clinical Practice and the Arguments for and Against: A Review of the Literature. [REVIEW] Nursing Ethics 11 (5):500-513.score: 54.0
    In general, most, but not necessarily all, patients want truthfulness about their health. Available evidence indicates that truth-telling practices and preferences are, to an extent, a cultural artefact. It is the case that practices among nurses and doctors have moved towards more honest and truthful disclosure to their patients. It is interesting that arguments both for and against truth-telling are established in terms of autonomy and physical and psychological harm. In the literature reviewed here, there is also the view (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  41. J. R. Lucas, The Lay-Out of Arguments.score: 54.0
    Arguments have been much misunderstood. Not only has it been assumed that they must be deductive, but it has been assumed also that, although often expressed in loose and elliptical form, they must be capable, if they are valid at all, of being expressed with absolute precision, as a set of necessary and sufficient conditions for the action in question to be appropriate. Mathematical arguments are capable of being stated precisely, and it has long been a reproach to (...)
    No categories
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  42. Mark T. Nelson (1996). Who Are the Best Judges of Theistic Arguments? Sophia 35 (2):1-12.score: 54.0
    The best judge of the soundness of a philosophical argument is the philosopher with the greatest philosophical aptitude, the deepest knowledge of the relevant subject matter, the most scrupulous character, and a disinterested position with respect to the subject matter. This last feature is important because even a highly intelligent and scrupulous judge may find it hard to reach the right conclusion about a subject in which he or she has a vested interest. When the subject of inquiry is the (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  43. Marcello Guarini (2004). A Defense of Non-Deductive Reconstructions of Analogical Arguments (AILACT Essay Competition Winner). Informal Logic 24 (2).score: 54.0
    Bruce Waller has defended a deductive reconstruction of the kinds of analogical arguments found in ethics, law, and metaphysics. This paper demonstrates the limits of such a reconstruction and argues for an alternative. non-deductive reconstruction. It will be shown that some analogical arguments do not fit Waller's deductive schema, and that such a schema does not allow for an adequate account of the strengths and weaknesses of an analogical argument. The similarities and differences between the account defended herein (...)
    Direct download (14 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  44. Georg Spielthenner (2010). A Logical Analysis of Slippery Slope Arguments. Health Care Analysis 18 (2):148-163.score: 54.0
    This article offers a logical analysis of Slippery Slope Arguments. Such arguments claim that adopting a certain act or policy would take us down a slippery slope to an undesirable bottom and infer from this that we should refrain from this act or policy. Even though a logical assessment of such arguments has not received much careful attention, it is of vital importance to their overall assessment because if the premises fail to support the conclusion an argument (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  45. D. M. Armstrong (1974). Infinite Regress Arguments and the Problem of Universals. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 52 (3):191 – 201.score: 53.0
    What is it for a particular to have a property? many proposed analyses of this situation may be called relational accounts. The particular has some relation, R, To some entity p. R may be the relation of falling under, Being a member of, Resembling or "participating." p may be a predicate, A concept, A class, A paradigm instance or a form. A number of arguments seek to prove that all these accounts are involved in various vicious infinite regresses. These (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  46. Michael McKenna (2012). Moral Responsibility, Manipulation Arguments, and History: Assessing the Resilience of Nonhistorical Compatibilism. [REVIEW] Journal of Ethics 16 (2):145-174.score: 53.0
    Manipulation arguments for incompatibilism all build upon some example or other in which an agent is covertly manipulated into acquiring a psychic structure on the basis of which she performs an action. The featured agent, it is alleged, is manipulated into satisfying conditions compatibilists would take to be sufficient for acting freely. Such an example used in the context of an argument for incompatibilism is meant to elicit the intuition that, due to the pervasiveness of the manipulation, the agent (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  47. Markus Pantsar (2009). Truth, Proof and Gödelian Arguments: A Defence of Tarskian Truth in Mathematics. Dissertation, University of Helsinkiscore: 53.0
    One of the most fundamental questions in the philosophy of mathematics concerns the relation between truth and formal proof. The position according to which the two concepts are the same is called deflationism, and the opposing viewpoint substantialism. In an important result of mathematical logic, Kurt Gödel proved in his first incompleteness theorem that all consistent formal systems containing arithmetic include sentences that can neither be proved nor disproved within that system. However, such undecidable Gödel sentences can be established to (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  48. James Dominic Rooney (2009). Reconsidering the Place of Teleological Arguments for the Existence of God in the Light of the ID/Evolution Controversy. Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association 83:227 - 240.score: 53.0
    Prompted by questions raised in the public arena concerning the validity of arguments for the existence of God based on "design" in the universe, I explore traditional teleological argument for the existence of God. Using the arguments offered by Thomas Aquinas as fairly representative of this classical line of argumentation going back to Aristotle, I attempt to uncover the hidden premises and construct arguments for the existence of God which are deductive in nature. To justify the premises (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  49. E. C. A. Asscher, I. Bolt & M. Schermer (2012). Wish-Fulfilling Medicine in Practice: A Qualitative Study of Physician Arguments. Journal of Medical Ethics 38 (6):327-331.score: 53.0
    There has been a move in medicine towards patient-centred care, leading to more demands from patients for particular therapies and treatments, and for wish-fulfilling medicine: the use of medical services according to the patient's wishes to enhance their subjective functioning, appearance or health. In contrast to conventional medicine, this use of medical services is not needed from a medical point of view. Boundaries in wish-fulfilling medicine are partly set by a physician's decision to fulfil or decline a patient's wish in (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  50. J. Bookman (1992). The Wisdom of the Many: An Analysis of the Arguments of Books III and IV of Aristotle's Politics. History of Political Thought 13 (1):1-12.score: 53.0
    Why should the many be accorded a role in governing? In Book III of his Politics, Aristotle advances a handful of arguments on behalf of their participation (1281a39-1282a41, 1286a31-35).2 These arguments deserve examination because they have been misunderstood and have, therefore, been accepted or rejected for the wrong reasons. They deserve examination too because the Greek theory and practice of democracy continues to exercise a powerful attraction upon contemporary generations. Aristotle is, of course, among the principal sources of (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
1 — 50 / 1000