Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Shallow Analysis and the Slingshot Argument.Michael Baumgartner - 2010 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 39 (5):531-556.
    According to the standard opinions in the literature, blocking the unacceptable consequences of the notorious slingshot argument requires imposing constraints on the metaphysics of facts or on theories of definite descriptions (or class abstracts). This paper argues that both of these well-known strategies to rebut the slingshot overshoot the mark. The slingshot, first and foremost, raises the question as to the adequate logical formalization of statements about facts, i.e. of factual contexts. It will be shown that a rigorous application of (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • The Value of Genetic Fallacies.Andrew C. Ward - 2010 - Informal Logic 30 (1):1-33.
    Since at least the 1938 publication of Hans Reichenbach’s Experience and Predication , there has been widespread agreement that, when discussing the beliefs that people have, it is important to distinguish contexts of discovery and contexts of justification. Traditionally, when one conflates the two contexts, the result is a “genetic fallacy”. This paper examines genealogical critiques and addresses the question of whether such critiques are fallacious and, if so, whether this vitiates their usefulness. The paper concludes that while there may (...)
    Direct download (11 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Resources for Research on Analogy: A Multi-Disciplinary Guide.Marcello Guarini, Amy Butchart, Paul Simard Smith & Andrei Moldovan - 2009 - Informal Logic 29 (2):84-197.
    Work on analogy has been done from a number of disciplinary perspectives throughout the history of Western thought. This work is a multidisciplinary guide to theorizing about analogy. It contains 1,406 references, primarily to journal articles and monographs, and primarily to English language material. classical through to contemporary sources are included. The work is classified into eight different sections (with a number of subsections). A brief introduction to each section is provided. Keywords and key expressions of importance to research on (...)
    Direct download (13 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  • An Informal Logic Bibliography.Hans V. Hansen - 1990 - Informal Logic 12 (3).
  • Der ‚Intentionale Fehlschluß‘ — Ein Dogma?Lutz Danneberg & Hans-Harald Müller - 1983 - Zeitschrift Für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 14 (2):376-411.
  • Interpreting Enthymematic Arguments Using Belief Revision.Georg Brun & Hans Rott - 2013 - Synthese 190 (18):4041-4063.
    This paper is about the situation in which an author (writer or speaker) presents a deductively invalid argument, but the addressee aims at a charitable interpretation and has reason to assume that the author intends to present a valid argument. How can he go about interpreting the author’s reasoning as enthymematically valid? We suggest replacing the usual find-the-missing-premise approaches by an approach based on systematic efforts to ascribe a belief state to the author against the background of which the argument (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • New Essays in Informal Logic.Trudy Govier - 1995 - Informal Logic 17 (3).
  • Fallacies: Classical and Contemporary Readings.Jim MacKenzie - 1996 - Informal Logic 18 (2).
  • The Problem of Validity Proofs.Michael Baumgartner & Timm Lampert - 2010 - Grazer Philosophische Studien 80 (1):79-109.
    In philosophical contexts, logical formalisms are often resorted to as a means to render the validity and invalidity of informal arguments formally transparent. Since Oliver and Massey , however, it has been recognized in the literature that identifying valid arguments is easier than identifying invalid ones. Still, any viable theory of adequate logical formalization should at least reliably identify valid arguments. This paper argues that accounts of logical formalization as developed by Blau and Brun do not meet that benchmark. The (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • The Asymmetry Thesis and the Diversity of "Invalid" Argument-Forms.George Bowles - 1999 - Informal Logic 19 (1).
    According to the Asymmetry Thesis, whereas there are many kinds of argument-forms that make at least some of their instances valid, there is none that makes any of its instances invalid. To refute this thesis, a counterexample has been produced in the form of an argument-form whose premise-form's instances are all logically true and whose conclusion form's instances are all logically false. The purpose of this paper is to show that there are many more kinds of argument-forms that make some (...)
    Direct download (12 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Affirming the Consequent.George Bowles - 1996 - Argumentation 10 (4):429-444.
    The thesis of this paper is that an argument's possessing the form of affirming the consequent does not suffice to make its premises at all favorably relevant to its conclusion. In support of this thesis I assume two premises and argue for a third. My two assumptions are these: (1) that an argument's possessing the form of affirming the consequent does not suffice to make its conclusion certain relative to its premises (this is widely, if not universally, acknowledged by writers (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Der 'Intentionale Fehlschluß' — Ein Dogma?Lutz Danneberg & Hans-Harald Müller - 1983 - Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 14 (1):103-137.
  • Most Assur'd of What He is Most Ignorant.Michael J. Wreen - 1996 - Erkenntnis 44 (3):341 - 368.
    No categories
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Arguments, Meta-Arguments, and Metadialogues: A Reconstruction of Krabbe, Govier, and Woods. [REVIEW]Maurice A. Finocchiaro - 2007 - 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  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations