Skip to main content
Log in

Reconsidering Contentious Argument: Augustus DeMorgan on Fallacy

  • Published:
Argumentation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This essay examines Augustus DeMorgan's chapter on fallacy in his Formal Logic (1847) in order to show how DeMorgan's treatment represents an expansion and advance upon Aristotle. It is important that Aristotle clearly distinguishes among dialectical, didactic, demonstrative, and contentious types of argument, based upon the acceptability of premises and the aims of participants. Appropriating Aristotle's list of fallacies, DeMorgan discusses examples that reveal how the charge and countercharge of fallacy function in contentious argument, which is more widespread than Aristotle imagined. DeMorgan's treatment of fallacy is in the spirit of Aristotle because of its focus on dialogue arguments, but it represents an advance because it expands the possible scenes of contention and shows how unshared premises and the will to win inform many argument situations. The emphasis on contention in natural-language argument puts DeMorgan in the company of his l9th century peers, Mill and Whately.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  • Aristotle: 1928, De Sophisticis Elenchis, trans. W. A. Pickard-Cambridge, The Works of Aristotle Translated into English, ed. W. D. Ross, Oxford University Press, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeMorgan, Augustus: 1847, Formal Logic: The Calculus of Inference, Necessary and Probable, Taylor and Walton, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, Hans V. and Robert C. Pinto (eds.): 1995 Fallacies: Classical and Contemporary Readings, Penn State University Press, University Park, Pennsylvania.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Mill, John Stuart: 1892, A System of Logic, Ratiocinative and Inductive, Routledge and Sons, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rice, Adrian: 1996, ‘Augustus DeMorgan: Historian of Science’, History of Science xxiv, 201-240.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Eemeren, Frans H. and Rob Grootendorst: 1992, Argumentation, Communication, and Fallacies: A Pragma-Dialectical Perspective, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, New Jersey.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whately, Richard: 1853, Elements of Logic, 8th London edition, Harper and Row, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Woods, John: 1999, ‘Augustus DeMorgan (1806-1871)’, Argumentation 13, 393-397.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Secor, M.J. Reconsidering Contentious Argument: Augustus DeMorgan on Fallacy. Argumentation 17, 131–143 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024074132005

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024074132005

Navigation