Bogency and Goodacies: On Argument Quality in Virtue Argumentation Theory

Informal Logic 35 (4):65-87 (2015)

Virtue argumentation theory has been charged of being incomplete, given its alleged inability to account for argument cogency in virtue-theoretical terms. Instead of defending VAT against that challenge, I suggest it is misplaced, since it is based on a premise VAT does not endorse, and raises an issue that most versions of VAT need not consider problematic. This in turn allows distinguishing several varieties of VAT, and clarifying what really matters for them.
Keywords Conflicting Virtues  Validity  Argument Quality  Virtue Argumentation Theory
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.22329/il.v35i1.4209
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 39,966
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

The Vices of Argument.Andrew Aberdein - 2016 - Topoi 35 (2):413-422.
Virtuous Norms for Visual Arguers.Andrew Aberdein - 2018 - Argumentation 32 (1):1-23.

View all 8 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Virtue and Arguers.José Ángel Gascón - 2016 - Topoi 35 (2):441-450.
The Vices of Argument.Andrew Aberdein - 2016 - Topoi 35 (2):413-422.
Virtue in Argument.Andrew Aberdein - 2010 - Argumentation 24 (2):165-179.
Virtue, In Context.Daniel H. Cohen - 2013 - Informal Logic 33 (4):471-485.
Virtue Argumentation and Bias.Aberdein Andrew - 2016 - Argumentation, Objectivity and Bias: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation (OSSA), May 18--21, 2016.


Added to PP index

Total views
21 ( #380,700 of 2,236,018 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
5 ( #368,805 of 2,236,018 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes

Sign in to use this feature