Applying Soundness Standards to Qualified Reasoning

Authors

  • Robert H. Ennis

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.22329/il.v24i1.2131

Keywords:

deductive validity, soundness, qualified reasoning, nonmonotonic reasoning, probable, probably, argument appraisal strategy, subjective probability, validity, ceteris paribus. prima facie. argument, argument standards, conduction, situation, background knowledge, critical thinking, informal logic

Abstract

Defining qualified reasoning as reasoning containing such loose qualifying words as 'probably,' 'usually,' 'probable, 'likely,' 'ceteris paribus,' and 'primafacie, Ennis argues that typical cases of qualified reasoning, though they might be good arguments, are deductively invalid, implying that such arguments fail soundness standards. He considers and rejects several possible alternative ways of viewing such cases, ending with a proposal for applying qualified soundness standards, which requires employment of sufficient background knowledge, sensitivity, experience and understanding of the situation. All of this takes place as part of the process, introduced elsewhere, of successively applying different legitimate sets of standards until one is found that is satisfied, or none is found, the latter calling for rejection of the argument, the former calling for its acceptance.

Downloads

Published

2004-01-01

Issue

Vol. 24 No. 1 (2004)

Section

Articles

License

Copyright for each article published in Informal Logic belongs to its author(s). Informal Logic has the right of first publication. Permission to reprint any article that appears in Informal Logic MUST be obtained in writing from the author(s). In addition to any form of acknowledgement required by the author(s), the following notice must be added to the statement of copyright permission made in the reprint (with the appropriate numbers replacing the ellipses): [Article Title] was originally published in Informal Logic, [year], Volume ..., Number ..., pp. ...-... .