Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Argumentative Patterns in the Political Domain: The Case of European Parliamentary Committees of Inquiry.Corina Andone - 2016 - Argumentation 30 (1):45-60.
    In this paper, close attention is paid to the argumentative patterns resulting from combining pragmatic argumentation in which a recommendation is made with arguments in which the majority is invoked. I focus on such argumentative patterns as employed by European parliamentary committees of inquiry conducting inquiries into the activity of the Equitable Life Assurance Society. By incorporating legal and political insights about the activity of these parliamentary committees of inquiry into a pragma-dialectical argumentative approach, an analysis will be given of (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
    Export citation  
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Peer Disagreement and the Bridge Principle.Marc-Kevin Daoust - forthcoming - Topoi:1-11.
    One explanation of rational peer disagreement is that agents find themselves in an epistemically permissive situation. In fact, some authors have suggested that, while evidence could be impermissive at the intrapersonal level, it is permissive at the interpersonal level. In this paper, I challenge such a claim. I will argue that, at least in cases of rational disagreement under full disclosure, there cannot be more interpersonal epistemically permissive situations than there are intrapersonal epistemically permissive situations. In other words, with respect (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
    Export citation  
  • How Many Laypeople Holding a Popular Opinion Are Needed to Counter an Expert Opinion?Jos Hornikx, Adam J. L. Harris & Jordy Boekema - 2018 - Thinking and Reasoning 24 (1):117-128.
    ABSTRACTIn everyday situations, people regularly receive information from large groups of people and from single experts. Although lay opinions and expert opinions have been studied extensively in isolation, the present study examined the relationship between the two by asking how many laypeople are needed to counter an expert opinion. A Bayesian formalisation allowed the prescription of this quantity. Participants were subsequently asked to assess how many laypeople are needed in different situations. The results demonstrate that people are sensitive to the (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
    Export citation