Argumentation 31 (2):433-449 (2017)

Authors
David Botting
De La Salle University (PhD)
Abstract
In “The Uses of Argument” Toulmin introduces a number of concepts that have become popular in argumentation theory, such as data, claim, warrant, backing, force, field, and, most fundamentally, the concept of a “logical type”. Toulmin never defines the concept of a logical type or a field very clearly, and different interpretations can be found in the literature, either reconstructing what Toulmin has in mind, or revising his concepts to suit other concerns. A natural history of these concepts is not my concern. I will analyse logical types according to what Toulmin uses this concept for, namely to raise a problem with deductive logic and motivate its replacement with the Toulmin model. I will argue that a logical type and the distinction he draws between different logical types resembles distinctions made in logical positivism between the directly and the indirectly verifiable, and the problem raised is, in essence, the positivist’s problem of how indirect propositions can be justified on the basis of direct propositions. I will show that Toulmin makes a straw man of the positivists’ own solution to the problem and hence does not prove there to be an adequate motivation for replacing deductive logic with the Toulmin model.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
ISBN(s)
DOI 10.1007/s10503-016-9414-6
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 53,548
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Studies in the Logic of Explanation.Carl Hempel & Paul Oppenheim - 1948 - Philosophy of Science 15 (2):135-175.
Studies in the Logic of Explanation.Carl G. Hempel & Paul Oppenheim - 1948 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 14 (2):133-133.
Rational Prediction.Wesley C. Salmon - 1981 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 32 (2):115-125.
Categories.G. Ryle - 1938 - Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 38:189 - 206.
Toulmin's “Analytic Arguments”.Ben Hamby - 2012 - Informal Logic 32 (1):116-131.

View all 10 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Toulmin's “Analytic Arguments”.Ben Hamby - 2012 - Informal Logic 32 (1):116-131.
From Logical Analysis to Conceptual History.Stephen Toulmin - 1969 - In Peter Achinstein & Stephen Francis Barker (eds.), The Legacy of Logical Positivism. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. pp. 25--52.
"Toulmin's Concept of" Reasonableness".David Simecek - 2011 - Filozofia 66 (5):458-462.
The Uses of Argument in Mathematics.Andrew Aberdein - 2005 - Argumentation 19 (3):287-301.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2016-10-08

Total views
18 ( #540,840 of 2,348,322 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
5 ( #147,956 of 2,348,322 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes