27 found

Year:

  1. Discovering Warrants in Political Argumentation.Irmtraud Gallhofer & Willem Saris - 2021 - Informal Logic 41 (4):641-676.
    Philosophers deny a proposal for actions can be deduced from arguments for or against the proposal because they may be incompatible. Nevertheless, people in general, and politicians especially, make decisions and present arguments they believe are convincing. We studied politicians who made decisions in complex situations. They spoke about possible actions, their consequences, the probabilities of these consequences and their evaluations, but rarely indicated why their arguments led to their choice. We hypothesized implicit argumentation rules involved and checked whether they (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  2. A Simple Theory of Argument Schemes.Geoff Goddu - 2021 - Informal Logic 41 (4):539-578.
    While there has been in depth discussion of many particular argumentation schemes, some lament that there is little to no theory underpinning the notion of an argumentation scheme. Here I shall argue against the utility of argument schemes, at least as a fundamental part of a complete theory of arguments. I shall also present and defend a minimalist theory of their nature—a scheme is just a set of proposition expressions and propositional functions. While simple, the theory contravenes several typical desiderata (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  3. Reflections on Minimal Adversariality.Trudy Govier - 2021 - Informal Logic 41 (4):523-537.
    Beginning with my 1999 account in The Philosophy of Argument, this essay explores views about adversariality in argument. Although my distinction between minimal and ancillary adversariality is widely accepted, there are flaws in my defense of the claim that all arguments exhibit minimal adversariality and in a lack of sensitivity to aspects of gender and culture. Further discussions of minimal adversariality, including those of Scott Aikin, John Casey, Katharina Stevens and Daniel Cohen, are discussed. The claim that all argument are (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  4. On Appeals to Non-Existent Authorities as Arguments From Analogy.Martin Hinton - 2021 - Informal Logic 41 (4):579-606.
    Herein, I consider arguments resting on an appeal to a non-existent authority as a species of argument from authority, and ultimately show them to be reliant on arguments from analogy in their inferential force. Three sub-types of argument are discussed: from authorities as yet unborn, no longer living, or incapable of ever doing so. In each case it is shown that an element of arguing from analogy is required since there can be no direct evidence of any assertions of the (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  5. In Memoriam.Sally Jackson - 2021 - Informal Logic 41 (4):691-693.
    Our beloved colleague, Charles Arthur Willard, has died at the age of 76. He will be remembered within the argumentation community not only as an influential theorist but also as one of the chief architects of an international and interdisciplinary field devoted to the study of argumentation.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  6. Notice of Books Received. [REVIEW]Informal Logic - 2021 - Informal Logic 41 (4):677-690.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  7. The Distinction Between False Dilemma and False Disjunctive Syllogism.Taeda Tomic - 2021 - Informal Logic 41 (4):607-639.
    Since a clear account of the fallacy of false disjunctive syllogism is missing in the literature, the fallacy is defined and its three types are differentiated after some preliminaries. Section 4 further elaborates the differentia specifica for each of the three types by analyzing relevant argument criticism of each, as well as the related profiles of dialogue. After defining false disjunctive syllogisms, it becomes possible to distinguish between a false dilemma and a false disjunctive syllogism: section 5 analyzes their similarities (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  8.  6
    Introduction to the Special Issue.Lilian Bermejo-Luque & Andrei Moldovan - 2021 - Informal Logic 41 (3):281-287.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  9.  1
    Act or Object.John Butterworth - 2021 - Informal Logic 41 (3):335-358.
    Many standard definitions of ‘argument’ that recognise an ambiguity between its active and objective senses seek to subsume these in various ways into a single, composite whole. This, it is argued, glosses over the distinction instead of exploiting its elucidatory potential. Whilst optimistic about the prospects of theory integration, the paper recommends a methodology of differentiation as a first necessary step towards any such goal. It starts by assuming that ‘argument’ refers —simultaneously and independently— to two different things, making space (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  10.  1
    Illocutionary Performance and Objective Assessment in the Speech Act of Arguing.Cristina Corredor - 2021 - Informal Logic 41 (3):453-483.
    This paper endorses a view of argumentation and arguments that relates both to a special type of speech action, namely, the performance of speech acts of arguing. Its aim is to advance an analysis of those acts that takes into account two kinds of norms related to their correct performance, namely, felicity conditions and objective requirements related to the “correspondence with the facts.” It assumes that the requirement that certain objective conditions be satisfied is among the set of felicity conditions (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  11.  3
    The Hermeneutic Priority of Which Question?Nathan Dickman - 2021 - Informal Logic 41 (3):485-508.
    An axiom of philosophical hermeneutics is that questioning has hermeneutic priority. Yet there are many different kinds of questions. Which sort has priority in understanding complete thoughts and for bringing about a fusion of horizons? Speech act theory is one resource for specifying which kind. I first develop the broad notion of questioning in philosophical hermeneutics. Second, I examine aspects of question taxonomies in pedagogy as well as their shortcomings. Third, I turn to the Speech Act approach to questioning and (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  12.  5
    Argumentative Bullshit.José Ángel Gascón - 2021 - Informal Logic 41 (3):289-308.
    Harry Frankfurt characterised bullshit as assertions that are made without a concern for truth. Assertions, however, are not the only type of speech act that can be bullshit. Here, I propose the concept of argumentative bullshit and show how a speech acts account of bullshit assertions can be generalised to bullshit arguments. Argumentative bullshit, on this account, would be the production of an argument without a concern for the supporting relation between reasons and claim.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  13. Speech Act Pluralism in Argumentative Polylogues.Marcin Lewinski - 2021 - Informal Logic 41 (3):421-451.
    I challenge two key assumptions of speech act theory, as applied to argumentation: illocutionary monism, grounded in the idea each utterance has only one illocutionary force, and the dyadic reduction, which models interaction as a dyadic affair between only two agents. I show how major contributions to speech act inspired study of argumentation adhere to these assumptions even as illocutionary pluralism in argumentative polylogues is a significant empirical fact in need of theoretical attention. I demonstrate this with two examples where (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  14.  1
    Inference Claims as Assertions.Matthew William Mckeon - 2021 - Informal Logic 41 (3):359-390.
    When a speaker states an argument in arguing—in its core sense—for the conclusion, the speaker asserts, as opposed to merely implies or implicates, the associated inference claim to the effect that the conclusion follows from the premises. In defense of this, I argue that how an inference claim is conveyed when stating an argument is constrained by constitutive and normative conditions for core cases of the speech of arguing for a conclusion. The speech act of assertion better reflects such conditions (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  15.  3
    Metaphorical Argumentation.Esther Romero & Belén Soria - 2021 - Informal Logic 41 (3):391-419.
    It is a fact that novel metaphorical utterances appear in natural language argumentation. It seems, moreover, that these put forward metaphorical propositions that can have different roles in argument structure. There can even be good argumentation which is indispensably metaphorical. However, not all metaphor theories provide an explanation of metaphorical meaning compatible with these claims. In this article, we explain the three main views on metaphorical meaning and show, analysing some examples, their consequences for metaphorical argumentation. Our analysis shows that (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  16.  2
    Argumentation and Fiction.Guillermo Sierra-Catalán - 2021 - Informal Logic 41 (3):309-334.
    Argumentation and fiction are quite different types of communicative phenomena. However, overlaps between them happen to be very frequent. We can both fictionalize by means of argumentation and argue by means of fiction. The main goal of this paper is to analyse the different types of overlap that may arise between argumentation and fiction. In this paper, the defended hypothesis is that by considering who the “character” that is arguing is, we can get an exhaustive account of any possible overlap, (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  17.  4
    Credible as Evidence? Multilayered Audience Reception of Narrative Arguments.Jarmila Bubikova-Moan - 2021 - Informal Logic 41 (2):187-217.
    Building on a view of both narration and argumentation as dynamic concepts, this paper considers ways of assessing the credibility of narrative arguments constructed in empirical examples of conversational discourse. I argue that the key in any such exercise is to pay close attention to both structural and pragmatic details, particularly how conversational storytelling gets embedded in the surrounding discourse and how the way this is discursively accomplished vis-à-vis the narrators’ multilayered audience may be reflective of their argumentative goals.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  18.  5
    Argumentation and Persistent Disagreement.Diego Castro - 2021 - Informal Logic 41 (2):245-280.
    Some disagreements seem to be persistent: they are, pretty much, immune to persuasive argumentation. If that is the case, how can they be overcome? Can argumentation help us? I propose that to overcome persistent disagreements through argumentation, we need a dynamic and pluralistic version of argumentation. Therefore, I propose that argumentation, more than a tool that uses persuasion to change the mind of the counterpart, is a toolbox that contains persuasion, deliberation, negotiation, and other dialogical strategies that can be used (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  19.  2
    Argumentation Ab Homine in Philosophy.Fernando Leal - 2021 - Informal Logic 41 (2):219-243.
    Argumentation that uses the beliefs of one’s opponents to refute them is well known. This paper proposes that there is a hitherto unnoticed counterpart to it, to be called ab homine, in which speakers/writers argue through the manner in which they deliver a message. Since the manner of delivery can never be turned into a premise or premises, this form of argumentation—although somewhat resembling Aristotle’s ethos—is much closer to the peculiar force of Socratic elenchos.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  20.  15
    Metaphilosophy and Argument: The Case of the Justification of Abduction.Paula Olmos - 2021 - Informal Logic 41 (2):131-164.
    This paper is an essay on metaphilosophy that reviews, describes, categorises, and discusses different ways philosophers have approached the justification of abduction as a mode of reasoning and arguing. Advocating an argumentative approach to abduction, I model the philosophical debate over its justification as the critical assessment of a warrant-establishing argument allowing “H explains D” to be used as a reason for “H can be inferred from D.” Philosophers have discussed the conditions under which such kind of generic argument can (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  21.  2
    Decoupling Representations and the Chain of Arguments.Cristián Santibáñez - 2021 - Informal Logic 41 (2):165-186.
    In this paper, I propose to understand argumentative decoupling—that is, the structural fact of the argumentative chain self-referring to one of its constituents in subsequent arguments—as part of the way in which cognitive decoupling representation works. In order to support this claim, I make use of part of the discussion developed in cognitive studies and evolutionary theories that describes this phenomenon when explaining intentional communication. By using Toulmin’s model, I exemplify how decoupling representation may be seen as part of a (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  22.  5
    Youth Voting, Rational Competency, and Epistemic Injustice.Michael Baumtrog - 2021 - Informal Logic 41 (1):41-55.
    In 1970 the voting age in Canada changed from 21 to 18. Since then, there have been calls to lower it further, most commonly to age 16. Against the motion, however, it has been argued that youth may lack the ability to exercise a mature and informed vote. This paper argues against that worry and shows how restricting youth from voting on the basis of a misbelief about their abilities amounts to an epistemic injustice.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  23.  5
    Editor's Note.Tracy Bowell - 2021 - Informal Logic 41 (1):81-106.
    In this paper, I consider whether there are limits to virtuous argumentation in certain situations. I consider three types of cases: 1) arguing against denier discourses, 2) arguing with people who make bigoted claims, and 3) cases in which marginalised people are expected to exercise virtues of argument from a position of limited agency. For each type of case, I look at where limits to arguing responsibly might be drawn. I argue that there are situations in which we might withdraw (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  24.  13
    “I Said What I Said”—Black Women and Argumentative Politeness Norms.Tempest Henning - 2021 - Informal Logic 41 (1):17-39.
    This paper seeks to complicate two primary norms within argumentation theory: 1) engaging with one’s interlocutors in a ‘pleasant’ tone and 2) speaking directly to one’s target audience/interlocutor. Moreover, I urge argumentation theorists to explore various cultures’ argumentative norms and practices when attempting to formulate more universal theories regarding argumentation. Ultimately, I aim to show that the two previously mentioned norms within argumentation obscure and misrepresent many argumentative practices within African American Vernacular English—or Ebonics, specifically the art of signifying.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  25.  10
    Argument and Social Justice" and "Reasoning for Change.Catherine Hundleby - 2021 - Informal Logic 41 (1):1-16.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  26.  4
    Picturing a Thousand Unspoken Words.Harmony Peach - 2021 - Informal Logic 41 (1):57-79.
    I explore how empathetic visual argument may be the mode best suited for eliciting appropriate force to the reasons given by arguers who face systematic identity prejudices. In the verbal mode, this force is often skewed through epistemic injustice, argumentative injustice, and discursive injustice. Highlighting their reliance on the Aristotelian sense of enthymeme, I show how visual arguments are highly context specific. Using Ian Dove’s Visual Scheming and the theory of the Retort collective via case study, I demonstrate how the (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  27.  13
    Deep Disagreement and Patience as an Argumentative Virtue.Kathryn Phillips - 2021 - Informal Logic 41 (1):107-130.
    During a year when there is much tumult around the world and in the United States in particular, it might be surprising to encounter a paper about patience and argumentation. In this paper, I explore the notion of deep disagreement, with an eye to moral and political contexts in particular, in order to motivate the idea that patience is an argumentative virtue that we ought to cultivate. This is particularly so because of the extended nature of argumentation and the slow (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
 Previous issues
  
Next issues