Results for ' zipper arguments'

999 found
Order:
  1.  20
    Zipper arguments and duties regarding future generations.Tim Meijers - 2024 - Politics, Philosophy and Economics 23 (2):181-204.
    Most of us believe that it would be unjust to act with indifference about the plight of future generations. Zipper arguments in intergenerational justice aim to show that we have duties of justice regarding future generations, regardless of whether we have duties of justice to future generations. By doing so, such arguments circumvent the foundational challenges that come with theorising duties to remote future generations, which result from the non-existence, non-identity and non-contemporaneity of future generations. I argue (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  2. Argument's value1.Ontological Arguments & G. O. D. In - 1998 - In William J. Wainwright (ed.), Philosophy of Religion. Routledge. pp. 2--54.
    No categories
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  3.  22
    Persistent questions in the theory of argument fields.Argument Fields - 1992 - In William L. Benoit, Dale Hample & Pamela J. Benoit (eds.), Readings in Argumentation. Foris Publications. pp. 11--417.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  4. Gem Anscombe.on A. Queer Pattern Of Argument - 1991 - In H. G. Lewis (ed.), Peter Geach: Philosophical Encounters. Kluwer Academic Publishers. pp. 121.
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  5. M raw.An Invisible Performative Argument, Geoffrey Leech, Robert T. Harms, Richard E. Palmer, Arnolds Grava, Tadeusz Batog, J. Kurylowicz, Dan I. Slobin, David McNeill & R. A. Close - 1973 - Foundations of Language 9:294.
    No categories
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  6.  20
    Was es nicht alles gibt! Neue ideen und argumente zu substanzen und (ihren) eigenschaften. 1 Christian Kanzian universitat innsbruck.Neue Ideen Und Argumente Zu - 2005 - Grazer Philosophische Studien: Internationale Zeitschrift für Analytische Philosophie. Vol. 70 70:215-223.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  7. A Place for Informal Logic Within Pragma-Dialectics.Of Argumentation - 2006 - In F. H. van Eemeren, Peter Houtlosser, Haft-van Rees & A. M. (eds.), Considering pragma-dialectics: a festschrift for Frans H. van Eemeren on the occasion of his 60th birthday. Mahwah, N.J.: L. Erlbaum Associates. pp. 63.
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  8.  18
    and Patterns of Variation.I. Kim’S. Exclusion Argument - 2013 - In Sophie C. Gibb & Rögnvaldur Ingthorsson (eds.), Mental Causation and Ontology. Oxford University Press. pp. 88.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  9.  37
    Act Utilitarianism and Decision Procedures.A. Revised Impracticability Argument - 1994 - Utilitas 6 (1).
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  10. Christopher Bennett.Moral Argument & Matt Matravers - 2001 - Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 4 (3):101.
    No categories
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  11.  48
    Justice, Contestability, and Conceptions of the Good.I. Barry'S. Argument - 1996 - Utilitas 8 (3).
  12.  12
    Justice et efficacité linguistique.Deux Arguments - 2005 - In Stéphane Courtois & Jocelyne Couture (eds.), Regards Philosophiques Sur la Mondialisation. Presses de l'Université du Québec. pp. 105.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  13. Moral realism and indeterminacy.I. An Epistemological Argument - 2002 - In Ernest Sosa & Enrique Villanueva (eds.), Realism and Relativism. Blackwell.
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  14.  15
    Roy A. Sorensen.Omniscience-Immutability Arguments - 1986 - American Philosophical Quarterly 23 (4).
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  15.  17
    The rediscovery of light.Arguments Concerning - 1998 - In Josefa Toribio & Andy Clark (eds.), Consciousness and Emotion in Cognitive Science: Conceptual and Empirical Issues. Garland. pp. 3--121.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  16. Emergent Truth and a Blind Spot.an Argument Against Physicalism - 2006 - Facta Philosophica: Internazionale Zeitschrift für Gegenwartsphilosophie: International Journal for Contemporary Philosophy 8:79-101.
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  17. Fw Householder.on Arguments From Asterisks - 1973 - Foundations of Language 10:365.
    No categories
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  18.  7
    Mediums and Messages.An Argument Against Biotechnical - 2004 - Ethical Perspectives 11:2-3.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  19. Three Arguments Against the Expertise Defense.Moti Mizrahi - 2015 - Metaphilosophy 46 (1):52-64.
    Experimental philosophers have challenged friends of the expertise defense to show that the intuitive judgments of professional philosophers are different from the intuitive judgments of nonphilosophers, and the intuitive judgments of professional philosophers are better than the intuitive judgments of nonphilosophers, in ways that are relevant to the truth or falsity of such judgments. Friends of the expertise defense have responded by arguing that the burden of proof lies with experimental philosophers. This article sketches three arguments which show that (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   21 citations  
  20. Eight Arguments for First‐Person Realism.David Builes - 2024 - Philosophy Compass 19 (1):e12959.
    According to First-Person Realism, one's own first-person perspective on the world is metaphysically privileged in some way. After clarifying First-Person Realism by reference to parallel debates in the metaphysics of modality and time, I survey eight different arguments in favor of First-Person Realism.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  21. Why Arguments from Expert Opinion are Weak Arguments.Moti Mizrahi - 2013 - Informal Logic 33 (1):57-79.
    In this paper, I argue that arguments from expert opinion, i.e., inferences from “Expert E says that p” to “p,” where the truth value of p is unknown, are weak arguments. A weak argument is an argument in which the premises, even if true, provide weak support—or no support at all—for the conclusion. Such arguments from expert opinion are weak arguments unless the fact that an expert says that p makes p significantly more likely to be (...)
    Direct download (15 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   27 citations  
  22. Evolutionary Debunking Arguments.Guy Kahane - 2010 - Noûs 45 (1):103-125.
    Evolutionary debunking arguments are arguments that appeal to the evolutionary origins of evaluative beliefs to undermine their justification. This paper aims to clarify the premises and presuppositions of EDAs—a form of argument that is increasingly put to use in normative ethics. I argue that such arguments face serious obstacles. It is often overlooked, for example, that they presuppose the truth of metaethical objectivism. More importantly, even if objectivism is assumed, the use of EDAs in normative ethics is (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   197 citations  
  23. Evaluating Arguments for the Sex/Gender Distinction.Tomas Bogardus - 2020 - Philosophia 48 (3):873-892.
    Many philosophers believe that our ordinary English words man and woman are “gender terms,” and gender is distinct from biological sex. That is, they believe womanhood and manhood are not defined even partly by biological sex. This sex/gender distinction is one of the most influential ideas of the twentieth century on the broader culture, both popular and academic. Less well known are the reasons to think it’s true. My interest in this paper is to show that, upon investigation, the (...) for the sex/gender distinction have feet of clay. In fact, they all fail. We will survey the literature and tour arguments in favor of the sex/gender distinction, and then we’ll critically evaluate those arguments. We’ll consider the argument from resisting biological determinism, the argument from biologically intersex people and vagueness, the argument from the normativity of gender, and some arguments from thought experiments. We’ll see that these arguments are not up to the task of supporting the sex/gender distinction; they simply don’t work. So, philosophers should either develop stronger arguments for the sex/gender distinction, or cultivate a variety of feminism that’s consistent with the traditional, biologically-based definitions of woman and man. (shrink)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   16 citations  
  24. Research and Human Experimentation/Further Reading Barber, Bernard, et al. Research on Human Subjects: Problems of Social Control In Medical Experimentation. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1973. [REVIEW]Moral Argument, Charles Fried, Alice M. Rivlin, P. Michael Timpane & Loren H. Roth - forthcoming - Bioethics: Basic Writings on the Key Ethical Questions That Surround the Major, Modern Biological Possibilities and Problems.
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  25. Arguments concerning representations for mental imagery.John R. Anderson - 1978 - Psychological Review (4):249-277.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   417 citations  
  26. Arguments For—Or Against—Probabilism?Alan Hájek - 2009 - In Franz Huber & Christoph Schmidt-Petri (eds.), Degrees of belief. London: Springer. pp. 229--251.
    Four important arguments for probabilism—the Dutch Book, representation theorem, calibration, and gradational accuracy arguments—have a strikingly similar structure. Each begins with a mathematical theorem, a conditional with an existentially quantified consequent, of the general form: if your credences are not probabilities, then there is a way in which your rationality is impugned. Each argument concludes that rationality requires your credences to be probabilities. I contend that each argument is invalid as formulated. In each case there is a mirror-image (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   82 citations  
  27. Knockdown Arguments.Nathan Ballantyne - 2014 - Erkenntnis 79 (S3):525-543.
    David Lewis and Peter van Inwagen have claimed that there are no “knockdown” arguments in philosophy. Their claim appears to be at odds with common philosophical practice: philosophers often write as though their conclusions are established or proven and that the considerations offered for these conclusions are decisive. In this paper, I examine some questions raised by Lewis’s and van Inwagen’s contention. What are knockdown arguments? Are there any in philosophy? If not, why not? These questions concern the (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   20 citations  
  28. Commodification Arguments for the Legal Prohibition of Organ Sale.Stephen Wilkinson - 2000 - Health Care Analysis 8 (2):189-201.
    The commercial trading of human organs, along withvarious related activities (for example, advertising)was criminalised throughout Great Britain under theHuman Organ Transplants Act 1989.This paper critically assesses one type of argumentfor this, and similar, legal prohibitions:commodification arguments.Firstly, the term `commodification' is analysed. Thiscan be used to refer to either social practices or toattitudes. Commodification arguments rely on thesecond sense and are based on the idea that having acommodifying attitude to certain classes of thing(e.g. bodies or persons) is wrong. The (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   12 citations  
  29. Arguments for–or against–Probabilism?Alan Hájek - 2008 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 59 (4):793-819.
    Four important arguments for probabilism—the Dutch Book, representation theorem, calibration, and gradational accuracy arguments—have a strikingly similar structure. Each begins with a mathematical theorem, a conditional with an existentially quantified consequent, of the general form: if your credences are not probabilities, then there is a way in which your rationality is impugned.Each argument concludes that rationality requires your credences to be probabilities.I contend that each argument is invalid as formulated. In each case there is a mirror-image theorem and (...)
    Direct download (10 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   50 citations  
  30. Evolutionary arguments against moral realism: Why the empirical details matter (and which ones do).Jeroen Hopster - 2018 - Biology and Philosophy 33 (5-6):41.
    The aim of this article is to identify the strongest evolutionary debunking argument against moral realism and to assess on which empirical assumptions it relies. In the recent metaethical literature, several authors have de-emphasized the evolutionary component of EDAs against moral realism: presumably, the success or failure of these arguments is largely orthogonal to empirical issues. I argue that this claim is mistaken. First, I point out that Sharon Street’s and Michael Ruse’s EDAs both involve substantive claims about the (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  31.  95
    Linkage Arguments for and Against Rights".James Nickel - 2022 - Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 42 (1):27-47.
    This article is about relations of support and conflict within systems of fundamental legal rights—and the arguments for and against rights that those relations make possible. Justificatory linkage arguments defend controversial rights by claiming that they provide very useful support to the realisation of well-accepted rights. This article analyses such arguments in detail and discusses their structures, uses and pitfalls. It then shows that linkage arguments can be used not just to defend rights, but also to (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  32. Three Arguments to Think that Faith Does Not Entail Belief.Daniel Howard-Snyder - 2018 - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 100 (1):114-128.
    On doxastic theories of propositional faith,necessarily,S has faith that p only if S believes that p. On nondoxastic theories of propositional faith, it’s false that,necessarily,S has faith that p only if S believes that p. In this article, I defend three arguments for nondoxastic theories of faith and I respond to published criticisms of them.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   21 citations  
  33. Arguments Against Metaphysical Indeterminacy and Vagueness.Elizabeth Barnes - 2010 - Philosophy Compass 5 (11):953-964.
    In this article, I survey some of the major arguments against metaphysical indeterminacy and vagueness and outline potential responses.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   19 citations  
  34. Transcendental arguments and scepticism: answering the question of justification.Robert Stern - 2000 - New York: Oxford University Press.
    Robert Stern investigates how scepticism can be countered by using transcendental arguments concerning the necessary conditions for the possibility of experience, language, or thought. He shows that the most damaging sceptical questions concern neither the certainty of our beliefs nor the reliability of our belief-forming methods, but rather how we can justify our beliefs.
  35. Analogical Arguments: Inferential Structures and Defeasibility Conditions.Fabrizio Macagno, Douglas Walton & Christopher Tindale - 2017 - Argumentation 31 (2):221-243.
    The purpose of this paper is to analyze the structure and the defeasibility conditions of argument from analogy, addressing the issues of determining the nature of the comparison underlying the analogy and the types of inferences justifying the conclusion. In the dialectical tradition, different forms of similarity were distinguished and related to the possible inferences that can be drawn from them. The kinds of similarity can be divided into four categories, depending on whether they represent fundamental semantic features of the (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   14 citations  
  36. Arguments for Nonparental Care for Children.Anca Gheaus - 2011 - Social Theory and Practice 37 (3):483-509.
    I review three existing arguments in favor of having some childcare done by nonparents and then I advance five arguments, most of them original, to the same conclusion. My arguments rely on the assumption that, no matter who provides it, childcare will inevitably go wrong at times. I discuss the importance of mitigating bad care, of teaching children how to enter caring relationships with people who are initially strangers to them, of addressing children's structural vulnerability to their (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   19 citations  
  37. Fifteen Arguments Against Hypothetical Frequentism.Alan Hájek - 2009 - Erkenntnis 70 (2):211-235.
    This is the sequel to my “Fifteen Arguments Against Finite Frequentism” ( Erkenntnis 1997), the second half of a long paper that attacks the two main forms of frequentism about probability. Hypothetical frequentism asserts: The probability of an attribute A in a reference class B is p iff the limit of the relative frequency of A ’s among the B ’s would be p if there were an infinite sequence of B ’s. I offer fifteen arguments against this (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   49 citations  
  38. Cosmological Arguments from Contingency.Joshua Rasmussen - 2010 - Philosophy Compass 5 (9):806-819.
    Cosmological arguments from contingency attempt to show that there is a necessarily existing god‐like being on the basis of the fact that any concrete things exist at all. Such arguments are built out of the following components: (i) a causal principle that applies to non‐necessary entities of a certain category; (ii) a reason to think that if the causal principle is true, then there would have to be a necessarily existing concrete thing; (iii) a reason to think that (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   10 citations  
  39. On Two Arguments for Fanaticism.Jeffrey Sanford Russell - 2023 - Noûs.
    Should we make significant sacrifices to ever-so-slightly lower the chance of extremely bad outcomes, or to ever-so-slightly raise the chance of extremely good outcomes? *Fanaticism* says yes: for every bad outcome, there is a tiny chance of extreme disaster that is even worse, and for every good outcome, there is a tiny chance of an enormous good that is even better. I consider two related recent arguments for Fanaticism: Beckstead and Thomas's argument from *strange dependence on space and time*, (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  40. Philosophical arguments.Charles Taylor - 1995 - Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
    In this book Taylor brings together some of his best essays, including "Overcoming Epistemology," "The Validity of Transcendental Argument," "Irreducibly Social ...
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   164 citations  
  41.  45
    Arguments from scientific practice in the debate about the physical equivalence of symmetry-related models.Joanna Luc - 2022 - Synthese 200 (2):1-29.
    In the recent philosophical literature, several counterexamples to the interpretative principle that symmetry-related models are physically equivalent have been suggested The Oxford handbook of philosophy of physics, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2013, Noûs 52:946–981, 2018; Fletcher in Found Phys 50:228–249, 2020). Arguments based on these counterexamples can be understood as arguments from scientific practice of roughly the following form: because in scientific practice such-and-such symmetry-related models are treated as representing distinct physical situations, these models indeed represent distinct physical (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  42.  40
    Three Arguments Against Institutional Conscientious Objection, and Why They Are (Metaphysically) Unconvincing.Xavier Symons & Reginald Mary Chua - 2024 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 49 (3):298-312.
    The past decade has seen a burgeoning of scholarly interest in conscientious objection in healthcare. While the literature to date has focused primarily on individual healthcare practitioners who object to participation in morally controversial procedures, in this article we consider a different albeit related issue, namely, whether publicly funded healthcare institutions should be required to provide morally controversial services such as abortions, emergency contraception, voluntary sterilizations, and voluntary euthanasia. Substantive debates about institutional responsibility have remained largely at the level of (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  43. Three Arguments for Absolute Outcome Measures.Jan Sprenger & Jacob Stegenga - 2017 - Philosophy of Science 84 (5):840-852.
    Data from medical research are typically summarized with various types of outcome measures. We present three arguments in favor of absolute over relative outcome measures. The first argument is from cognitive bias: relative measures promote the reference class fallacy and the overestimation of treatment effectiveness. The second argument is decision-theoretic: absolute measures are superior to relative measures for making a decision between interventions. The third argument is causal: interpreted as measures of causal strength, absolute measures satisfy a set of (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   10 citations  
  44. William P. Alston.Thoughts On Evidential & Arguments From Evil - 2002 - In William Lane Craig (ed.), Philosophy of religion: a reader and guide. New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press.
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  45.  12
    Two arguments against foundationalism. [REVIEW]Paul Cortios Ritual, Jane Duran, Two Arguments Against Foundatationalism, David Kaspar, Sara Worley & Tjeerd B. Jongeling - 2002 - Philosophia 29 (1-4):241-252.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  46. Triviality Arguments Reconsidered.Paul Schweizer - 2019 - Minds and Machines 29 (2):287-308.
    Opponents of the computational theory of mind have held that the theory is devoid of explanatory content, since whatever computational procedures are said to account for our cognitive attributes will also be realized by a host of other ‘deviant’ physical systems, such as buckets of water and possibly even stones. Such ‘triviality’ claims rely on a simple mapping account of physical implementation. Hence defenders of CTM traditionally attempt to block the trivialization critique by advocating additional constraints on the implementation relation. (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  47. Quantificational arguments in temporal adjunct clauses.Ron Artstein - 2005 - Linguistics and Philosophy 28 (5):541 - 597.
    Quantificational arguments can take scope outside of temporal adjunct clauses, in an apparent violation of locality restrictions: the sentence few secretaries cried after each executive resigned allows the quantificational NP each executive to take scope above few secretaries. I show how this scope relation is the result of local operations: the adjunct clause is a temporal generalized quantifier which takes scope over the main clause (Pratt and Francez, Linguistic and Philosophy 24(2), 187–222. [2001]), and within the adjunct clause, the (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  48. Philosophical Arguments Against the A-Theory.Daniel Deasy - 2018 - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 99 (2):270-292.
    According to the A-theory of time some instant of time is absolutely present. Many reject the A-theory on the grounds that it is inconsistent with current spacetime physics, which appears to leave no room for absolute presentness. However, some reject the A-theory on purely philosophical grounds. In this article I describe three purely philosophical arguments against the A-theory and show that there are plausible A-theoretic responses to each of them. I conclude that, whatever else is wrong with the A-theory, (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   11 citations  
  49. Inconsistency arguments still do not matter.Bruce Philip Blackshaw, Nicholas Colgrove & Daniel Rodger - 2022 - Journal of Medical Ethics 48 (7):485-487.
    William Simkulet has recently criticised Colgrove et al ’s defence against what they have called inconsistency argumentsarguments that claim opponents of abortion act in ways inconsistent with their underlying beliefs about human fetuses. Colgrove et al presented three objections to inconsistency arguments, which Simkulet argues are unconvincing. Further, he maintains that OAs who hold that the fetus is a person at conception fail to act on important issues such as the plight of frozen embryos, poverty and spontaneous (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  50.  22
    Transcendental arguments and metaphysical neutrality: A Wittgensteinian proposal.Sidra Shahid - 2024 - European Journal of Philosophy 32 (2):476-488.
    Despite periods of resurgence over the last decades, it is safe to say that transcendental arguments no longer enjoy a prominent presence in the philosophical landscape. One reason for their declining prominence is the sustained suspicion that despite their self‐proclaimed metaphysical neutrality, transcendental arguments are, in fact, metaphysically committed. This paper aims to revive the discussion of transcendental considerations by offering a metaphysically neutral account of transcendental arguments. I argue that a metaphysically neutral conception of transcendental (...) requires a revision of two concepts constitutive of transcendental claims, namely, transcendental necessity and the a priori. I propose a transcendental reading of Wittgenstein's On Certainty, which, I maintain, provides us with an alternative, metaphysically neutral understanding of these concepts. Thus revised, transcendental claims are suitable for what Mark Sacks once described as the “post‐metaphysical” orientation of contemporary philosophy. (shrink)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
1 — 50 / 999