Deduction without Dogmas:The Case of Moral Analogical Argumentation

Informal Logic 34 (3):311-336 (2014)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

a recent paper, Fábio Perin Shecaira proposes a defence of Waller’s deductivist schema for moral analogical argumentation. This defence has several flaws, the most important of them being that many good analogical arguments would be deemed bad or deficient. Additionally, Shecaira misrepresents my alternative account as something in between deductivism and non-deductivism. This paper is both an attempt at solving this misunderstanding and an analysis and criticism of Waller and Shecaira’s forms of deductivism.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 98,418

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2014-09-16

Downloads
30 (#616,876)

6 months
10 (#312,166)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Lilian Bermejo Luque
University of Granada

References found in this work

The Uses of Argument.Stephen E. Toulmin - 1958 - Philosophy 34 (130):244-245.
Introduction to Logic.Irving Marmer Copi, Carl Cohen & Kenneth McMahon - 1953 - New York, NY, USA: Macmillan. Edited by Carl Cohen & K. D. McMahon.
Introduction to Logic.Irving M. Copi - 1954 - Philosophy 29 (110):271-271.

View all 14 references / Add more references