Informal Logic 36 (1):1-25 (2016)
AbstractI argue for the distinction between presuming that p and maintaining that presumably p. In order to make sense of this distinction, I defend a non-inferentialist conception of presumptions and offer an account of the correctness conditions for both presumptions and presumptive inferences. I characterize presumptions as a type of constative speech-act having certain semantic correctness conditions. In turn, regarding presumptive inferences, my strategy is to provide the correctness conditions for the use of an epistemic modal such as “presumably.” This epistemic modal is characterized as a force indicator for speech-acts of concluding in complex speech-acts of arguing involving presumptive inferences.
Similar books and articles
Assessing Presumptions in Argumentation: Being a Sound Presumption Vs. Being Presumably the Case.Lilian Bermejo-Luque - unknown
Presumptive Reasoning in Interpretation. Implicatures and Conflicts of Presumptions.Fabrizio Macagno - 2012 - Argumentation 26 (2):233-265.
Dialectical and Heuristic Arguments: Presumptions and Burden of Proof.Fabrizio Macagno - 2010 - In C. Tindale & C. Reed (eds.), Dialectics, Dialogue and Argumentation: An Examination of Douglas Walton's Theories of Reasoning and Argument. College Publications. pp. 45-57.
The Presumptions of Meaning. Hamblin and Equivocation.Fabrizio Macagno - 2011 - Informal Logic 31 (4):367-393.
Presuming and Presumption in Everyday Argumentation: A Response to Godden and Walton.Fred J. Kauffeld - unknown
Implicatures and Hierarchies of Presumptions.Fabrizio Macagno - 2011 - In Argument Cultures: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation (OSSA) (University of Windsor, ON 18-21 May 2011). OSSA. pp. 1-17.
Moral Realism, Face-Values and Presumptions.Neil Sinclair - 2012 - Analytic Philosophy 53 (2):158-179.
Presumptions and the Distribution of Argumentative Burdens in Acts of Proposing and Accusing.Fred J. Kauffeld - 1997 - Argumentation 12 (2):245-266.
The Epistemic Relevance of Social Considerations in Ordinary Day-to-Day Presumptions.Fred J. Kauffeld - unknown
Who is Presumed Innocent of What by Whom?Carl-Friedrich Stuckenberg - 2014 - Criminal Law and Philosophy 8 (2):301-316.
Reconstructing and Assessing the Conditions of Meaningfulness. An Argumentative Approach to Presupposition.Fabrizio Macagno - 2012 - In H. Ribeiro (ed.), Inside Arguments: Logic And The Study of Argumentation. Cambridge Scholars Press. pp. 247--268.
The Dialogical Force of Implicit Premises. Presumptions in Enthymemes.Fabrizio Macagno & Giovanni Damele - 2013 - Informal Logic 33 (3):361-389.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
Citations of this work
Illocution and accommodation in the functioning of presumptions.Maciej Witek - 2019 - Synthese 198 (7):6207-6244.
Recognizing Argument Types and Adding Missing Reasons.Christoph Lumer - 2019 - In Bart J. Garssen, David Godden, Gordon Mitchell & Jean Wagemans (eds.), Proceedings of the Ninth Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation (ISSA). [Amsterdam, July 3-6, 2018.]. Amsterdam (Netherlands): pp. 769-777.
Presumptions, Assumptions, and Presuppositions of Ordinary Arguments.Gilbert Plumer - 2017 - Argumentation 31 (3):469-484.
Presumption as a Modal Qualifier: Presumption, Inference, and Managing Epistemic Risk.David Godden - 2017 - Argumentation 31 (3):485-511.
References found in this work
Linguistic Communication and Speech Acts.Kent Bach & Robert M. Harnish - 1979 - Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Dialectics: A Controversy-Oriented Approach to the Theory of Knowledge.Nicholas Rescher - 1977 - State University of New York Press.
Linguistic Communication and Speech Acts.Warren Ingber, Kent Bach & Robert M. Harnish - 1982 - Philosophical Review 91 (1):134.
Acceptable Premises: An Epistemic Approach to an Informal Logic Problem.James B. Freeman - 2005 - Cambridge University Press.