Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Contexts of Begging the Question

  • Published:
Argumentation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this paper a dialogical account of begging the question is applied to various contexts which are not obviously dialogues: - reading prose, working through a deductive system, presenting a legal case, and thinking to oneself. The account is then compared with that in chapter eight of D. Walton'sBegging the Question (New York; Greenwood, 1991).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aristotle.An.Pr.:Prior Analytics, tr. A. J. Jenkinson, in hisWorks, translated into English under the editorship of W. D. Ross, Vol.1, London, Oxford University Press, 1928, repr. 1968. References by book and chapter, and by the Bekker pagination.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aristotle.An.Post.:Posterior Analytics, tr. G. R. G. Mure, in hisWorks (op. cit.), Vol.1.

  • Artistotle.Top.:Topics, tr. W. A. Pickard-Cambridge, in hisWorks (op. cit.) Vol.1.

  • Foucault, Michel: 1972,The Archaeology of Knowledge, tr. A. M. Sheridan Smith, London, Tavistock.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamblin, Charles L: 1970,Fallacies, London, Methuen.

  • Jackson, Frank: 1984, ‘Petitio and the purpose of arguing’,Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 65: 26–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joske, Percy Ernest: 1982,Law and Procedure for Meetings in Australia, 7th Edn. W. J. Chappenden, (ed.), Sydney, Law Book Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keynes, John Neville: 1884,Studies and Exercises in Formal Logic, 4th Edn, 1906, London, Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein, Jacob: 1965,A Commentary on Plato's ‘Meno’, Chapel Hill, University of North Carolina Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kneale, William & Martha Kneale: 1962,The Development of Logic, Oxford, Clarendon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lakatos, Imre: 1976,Proofs and Refutations, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mackenzie, Jim: 1980, ‘Why do we number theorems?’,Australasian Journal of Philosophy 58: 135–149.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mackenzie, Jim: 1984b, Begging the question in dialogue.Australasian Journal of Philosophy 62: 174–181.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mackenzie, Jim: 1984c, ‘Confirmation of a conjecture of Peter of Spain concerning question-begging arguments’,Journal of Philosophical Logic 13: 35–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mackenzie, Jim: 1985, ‘No logic before Friday’,Synthese 63: 329–341.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mackenzie, Jim: 1990, ‘Four dialogue systems,Studia Logica’49: 567–583.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, Errol P., & Robert K. Meyer: 1982, ‘Solution to theP-W problem’,Journal of Symbolic Logic 47: 869–887.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, Robert K., Errol P. Martin, & Robert Dwyer, 1983: ‘The fundamentalS-theorem - a corollary’,The Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 24: 509–516.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mill, John Stuart: 1843,A System of Logic, 8th Edn, 1874, repr. London, Longmans, 1967.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peter of Spain [later Pope John XXI].Summ.Log.: Language in Dispute, an English translation of Peter of Spain'sTractatus [1245?], called afterwardsSummulae Logicales, on the basis of the critical edition established by L. M. de Rijk, tr. Francis P. Dinneen, Amsterdam, John Benjamins, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  • Plato.Meno: Meno, in hisProtagoras and Meno, tr. W. K. C. Guthrie, Harmondsworth, Middlesex, Penguin, 1956, repr. 1964.

    Google Scholar 

  • PlatoPhaedr.: Phaedrus, in hisPhaedrus and the Seventh and Eighth Letters, tr. Walter Hamilton. Harmondsworth, Middlesex, Penguin, 1973.

    Google Scholar 

  • Plato.Theaetet.:Theaetetus, tr. Robin A. H. Waterfield, London, Penguin, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  • Popper, Karl R.: 1969,Conjectures and Refutations, 3rd Edn., London, Routledge & Kegan Paul.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robert, Henry M.: 1969,Rules of Order [1876], with a commentary by Rachel Vixman, Westwood, N.J., Revell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, Richard: 1971, Begging the question, 1971,Analysis 31: 113–117.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, Richard: 1981, Begging the question, 1981,Analysis 41: 65.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ross, W. David.: 1953,Aristotle, 5th Edn., London, Methuen.

  • Sextus Empiricus.Pyrrh.Hyp.:Outlines of Pyrrhonism, with a tr. by E. G. Bury, London, William Heinemann, the Loeb Classical Library, 1933, repr. 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sorensen, Roy A.: 1991, ‘“P, therefore P” without circularity’,Journal of Philosophy 88: 249–266.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Eemeren, Frans H., & Rob Grootendorst: 1987, ‘Fallacies in pragma-dialectical perspective’,Argumentation 1: 283–301.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walton, Douglas: 1991,Begging the Question, New York, Greenwood.

  • Walton, Douglas, & Lynn M. Batten: 1984, ‘Games, graphs and circular arguments’,Logique et Analyse 106: 133–164.

    Google Scholar 

  • Woods, John, & Douglas Walton: 1982, ‘Arresting circles in formal dialogue’,Nous 16: 585–605.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Social and Policy Studies, University of Sydney, 2006, New South Wales, Australia

    Jim Mackenzie

Authors
  1. Jim Mackenzie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Mackenzie, J. Contexts of Begging the Question. Argumentation 8, 227–240 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00711190

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00711190

Key words

Search

Navigation