Informal Logic 16 (3):147-157 (1994)

There are many radically different ways of understanding the distinction between linked and convergent arguments. This paper provides a generic model which enables one to articulate in a rigorous manner the important differences as well as the underlying similarities that exist between competing proposals. In addition, the paper offers a TRUE (Type Reduction Upon Elimination) test for distinguishing linked from convergent arguments which best captures the informal intuition that linked arguments are especially vulnerable to local criticisms pertaining to premise acceptability
Keywords linked and convergent arguments, argument vulnerability, tinkering functions, zapped premise sets, logical support
Categories (categorize this paper)
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: 55,825
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Advances in Pragma-Dialectics.David Hitchcock - 2003 - Informal Logic 23 (1).

View all 6 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles


Added to PP index

Total views
11 ( #790,505 of 2,401,549 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #551,447 of 2,401,549 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes