Authors
David Godden
Michigan State University
Abstract
Toulmin’s DWC model recognizes a plurality of argument cultures through the thesis of field dependency: that the normative features of arguments vary from one field to the next. Yet, little consensus exists concerning the nature and foundations of argument fields. This paper explores the question of whether Toulminian fields have any useful role to play in the epistemic evaluation of arguments.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
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: 71,379
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

The Uses of Argument.Stephen E. Toulmin - 1958 - Cambridge University Press.
Knowledge in a Social World.Alvin Ira Goldman - 1999 - Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
Knowledge in a Social World.Alvin I. Goldman - 2002 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 64 (1):185-190.
The Uses of Argument.Stephen E. Toulmin - 1958 - Philosophy 34 (130):244-245.

View all 16 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Toulmin's “Analytic Arguments”.Ben Hamby - 2012 - Informal Logic 32 (1):116-131.
Moral and Epistemic Open-Question Arguments.Chris Heathwood - 2009 - Philosophical Books 50 (2):83-98.
The Uses of Argument in Mathematics.Andrew Aberdein - 2005 - Argumentation 19 (3):287-301.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2015-04-02

Total views
12 ( #812,853 of 2,519,696 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #406,314 of 2,519,696 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes