Results for 'good argument'

1000+ found
Order:
  1. A Suspicious Feature of the Popper/Miller Argument.I. J. Good - 1990 - Philosophy of Science 57 (3):535-536.
    The form of argument used by Popper and Miller to attack the concept of probabilistic induction is applied to the slightly different situation in which some evidence undermines a hypothesis. The result is seemingly absurd, thus bringing the form of argument under suspicion.
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  2.  10
    A Reinstatement, in Response to Gillies, of Redhead's Argument in Support of Induction.I. J. Good - 1987 - Philosophy of Science 54 (3):470-472.
  3.  27
    Justice, Contestability, and Conceptions of the Good.I. Barry'S. Argument - 1996 - Utilitas 8 (3).
  4.  90
    Kant’s Post-1800 Disavowal of the Highest Good Argument for the Existence of God.Samuel Kahn - 2018 - Kant Yearbook 10 (1):63-83.
    I have two main goals in this paper. The first is to argue for the thesis that Kant gave up on his highest good argument for the existence of God around 1800. The second is to revive a dialogue about this thesis that died out in the 1960s. The paper is divided into three sections. In the first, I reconstruct Kant’s highest good argument. In the second, I turn to the post-1800 convolutes of Kant’s Opus postumum (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  5.  51
    ¿Qué Es Un Buen Argumento? (What is a Good Argument?).Carlos Pereda - 1996 - Theoria 11 (1):7-20.
    Las preguntas importantes, o que parecen importantes, no tienen por qué tener respuestas importantes, incluso no tienen por qué tener respuestas. Me propongo explorar qué respuestas, importantes o no importantes, puede recibir, si es que puede recibir alguna respuesta, la importante pregunta “¿qué es un buen argumento?”.Important questions, or questions that seem important, need not have important answers, moreover, they need not have answers at all. I propose to explore what answers, whether important or not, we could obtain, if some (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  6.  50
    What's a Good Argument?John W. Powell - 2010 - The Philosophers' Magazine 51 (51):87-92.
    Becoming knowledgeable about good arguments through arguing, through focused involvement and educational progress through stages of deepeningunderstanding, is a logically prior requirement to being able to give a set of criteria or a definition of a good argument. So rather than seek a definition or criteria, we should seek expertise, wisdom regarding what we were tempted to define, through the long, slow and gradually deepening involvement in thinking things through.
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  7.  1
    What’s a Good Argument?John W. Powell - 2010 - The Philosophers' Magazine 51:87-92.
    Becoming knowledgeable about good arguments through arguing, through focused involvement and educational progress through stages of deepeningunderstanding, is a logically prior requirement to being able to give a set of criteria or a definition of a good argument. So rather than seek a definition or criteria, we should seek expertise, wisdom regarding what we were tempted to define, through the long, slow and gradually deepening involvement in thinking things through.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  8.  52
    One Bad and One Not Very Good Argument Against Holism.Richard B. Miller - 1997 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 75 (2):234-40.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  9. Is There a Good Argument Against the Incorrigibility Thesis?Frank Jackson - 1973 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 51 (1):51-62.
    "the incorrigibility thesis", The thesis that it is logically impossible to be mistaken about such things as whether I am now in pain or am seeing or seeming to see something red, Is very widely supposed to be false. I consider the arguments designed to show this, And argue that they all fail.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   42 citations  
  10.  35
    What is a Good Argument?Trudy Govier - 1992 - Metaphilosophy 23 (4):393-409.
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  11.  5
    What is a Good Argument?Dale Hample - 1992 - In William L. Benoit, Dale Hample & Pamela J. Benoit (eds.), Readings in Argumentation. Foris Publications. pp. 11--313.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  12.  9
    Informal Logic: A Prolegomenon to Good Argument Leo Groarke and Christopher Tindale Bristol, IN: Wyndham Hall Press, 1985. Pp. 70.Mary Richardson - 1986 - Dialogue 25 (4):787-.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  13. What Makes a Good Argument.Jf Voss & L. Militello - 1989 - Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society 27 (6):488-488.
    No categories
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  14. Is There a Good Epistemological Argument Against Platonism?David Liggins - 2006 - Analysis 66 (2):135–141.
    Platonism in the philosophy of mathematics is the doctrine that there are mathematical objects such as numbers. John Burgess and Gideon Rosen have argued that that there is no good epistemological argument against platonism. They propose a dilemma, claiming that epistemological arguments against platonism either rely on a dubious epistemology, or resemble a dubious sceptical argument concerning perceptual knowledge. Against Burgess and Rosen, I show that an epistemological anti- platonist argument proposed by Hartry Field avoids both (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   13 citations  
  15.  72
    Saying Good-Bye to the Direct Argument the Right Way.Michael McKenna - 2008 - Philosophical Review 117 (3):349-383.
    Peter van Inwagen contends that nonresponsibility transfers across deterministic relations. Suppose it does. If the facts of the past and the laws of nature entail every truth about what one does, and no one is even in part morally responsible for the past and the laws, then no one is even in part morally responsible for what one does. This argument, the Direct Argument, has drawn various critics, who have attempted to produce counterexamples to its core inference principle. (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  16. Plantinga's Version of the Free-Will Argument: The Good and Evil That Free Beings Do.Kenneth Einar Himma - 2010 - Religious Studies 46 (1):21-39.
    According to Plantinga's version of the free-will argument (FWA), the existence of free beings in the world who, on the whole, do more good than evil is the greater moral good that cannot be secured by even an omnipotent God without allowing some evil and thereby shows the logical compatibility of God with evil. In this essay, I argue that there are good empirical and moral reasons, from the standpoint of one plausible conception of Christian ethics, (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  17.  86
    Analysing the Good Will: Kant's Argument in the First Section of the Groundwork.Tom Bailey - 2010 - British Journal for the History of Philosophy 18 (4):635-662.
    This article contends that the first section of Kant's Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals provides a sophisticated and valid argument, and that commentators are therefore mistaken in dismissing this section as flawed. In particular, the article undertakes to show that in this section Kant argues from a conception of the goodness of a good will to two distinctive features of moral goodness, and from these features to his ?formula of universal law?. The article reveals the sophistication and (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  18. Saying Good-Bye to the Direct Argument the Right Way.Michael McKenna - 2008 - Philosophical Review 117 (3):349-383.
    Peter van Inwagen contends that nonresponsibility transfers across deterministic relations. Suppose it does. If the facts of the past and the laws of nature entail every truth about what one does, and no one is even in part morally responsible for the past and the laws, then no one is even in part morally responsible for what one does. This argument, the Direct Argument, has drawn various critics, who have attempted to produce counterexamples to its core inference principle. (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  19. Good News for Moral Error Theorists: A Master Argument Against Companions in Guilt Strategies.Christopher Cowie - 2016 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 94 (1):115-130.
    Moral error theories are often rejected by appeal to ‘companions in guilt’ arguments. The most popular form of companions in guilt argument takes epistemic reasons for belief as a ‘companion’ and proceeds by analogy. I show that this strategy fails. I claim that the companions in guilt theorist must understand epistemic reasons as evidential support relations if her argument is to be dialectically effective. I then present a dilemma. Either epistemic reasons are evidential support relations or they are (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   12 citations  
  20.  68
    A New Argument for the Multiplicity of the Good-for Relation.Jeff Behrends - 2011 - Journal of Value Inquiry 45 (2):121-133.
  21.  98
    Good Athlete - Bad Athlete? On the 'Role-Model Argument' for Banning Performance-Enhancing Drugs.Thomas Søbirk Petersen - 2010 - Sport, Ethics and Philosophy 4 (3):332-340.
    The paper critically discusses a role-model argument (RMA) in favour of banning performance-enhancing drugs in sport. The argument concludes that athletes should be banned from using performance-enhancing drugs because if they are allowed to use such drugs they will encourage, or cause, youngsters who look up to them to use drugs in a way that would be harmful. In Section 2 the structure of the argument and some versions of it are presented. In Section 3 a critical (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  22. Good, God, and the Open-Question Argument.Andrew Fisher - 2005 - Religious Studies 41 (3):335-341.
    In Finite and Infinite Goods, Robert Adams defends his metaphysical account that good is resemblance to God via an ‘open-question’ intuition. It is, however, unclear what this intuition amounts to. I give two possible readings: one based on the semantic framework Adams employs, and another based on Adams's account of humankind's epistemological limitations. I argue that neither of these readings achieves Adams's advertised aim.
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  23.  26
    Is Atheism Good Evidence for Atheism ? On John Schellenberg’s Argument From Ignorance.Cyrille Michon - 2015 - European Journal for Philosophy of Religion 7 (1):71--88.
    The argument from ignorance mounted by John Schellenberg argues from the existence of non-faulty unbelief to the non-existence of God, from the fact of atheism or agnosticism to the truth of atheism. It relies on two putative conceptual relations: between the idea of love and that of personal relationship, and between personal relationship and existential belief on each side of the relation concerning the other relatum. I argue that each is debatable, and so the argument cannot proceed.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  24.  48
    When Technologies Make Good People Do Bad Things: Another Argument Against the Value-Neutrality of Technologies.David R. Morrow - 2013 - Science and Engineering Ethics (2):1-15.
    Although many scientists and engineers insist that technologies are value-neutral, philosophers of technology have long argued that they are wrong. In this paper, I introduce a new argument against the claim that technologies are value-neutral. This argument complements and extends, rather than replaces, existing arguments against value-neutrality. I formulate the Value-Neutrality Thesis, roughly, as the claim that a technological innovation can have bad effects, on balance, only if its users have “vicious” or condemnable preferences. After sketching a microeconomic (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  25. Argument Essay: Biodiesel–A Good Experiment Gone Wrong.Jason Thiessen - forthcoming - Argument: Biannual Philosophical Journal.
    No categories
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  26.  15
    Argument and Its Uses (OSSA 2005 Keynote Address).J. Anthony Blair - 2004 - Informal Logic 24 (2):137-151.
    Do not define argument by its use to persuade. for other uses of arguments exist. An argument is a proposition and a reason for it. and argumentation is an interchange involving two or more parties resulting in the assertion of one or more arguments coupled with anticipated or actual critical responses. A logically good argument has grounds adeq uate for the purposes at hand (true, probable, plausible, acceptable to the audience) and the grounds provide adequate support (...)
    Direct download (12 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   15 citations  
  27.  79
    Humanity, Obligation, and the Good Will: An Argument Against Dean's Interpretation of Humanity.Lara Denis - 2010 - Kantian Review 15 (1):118-141.
    Humanity is an important notion within Kant's moral theory. The humanity formulation of the categorical imperative commands: ‘So act that you use humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, always at the same time as an end, never merely as a means’ . Kant's analysis of ethical obligation and his expositions of rights and duties in the Metaphysics of Morals refer frequently to humanity. How we understand this concept, then, has signifcant implications for how (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  28. A Fallacy in Aristotle’s Argument About the Good.P. Glassen - 1957 - Philosophical Quarterly 7 (29):319-322.
  29.  15
    Good Parents, Better Babies : An Argument About Reproductive Technologies, Enhancement and Ethics.Erik Malmqvist - unknown
    This study is a contribution to the bioethical debate about new and possibly emerging reproductive technologies. Its point of departure is the intuition, which many people seem to share, that using such technologies to select non-disease traits – like sex and emotional stability - in yet unborn children is morally problematic, at least more so than using the technologies to avoid giving birth to children with severe genetic diseases, or attempting to shape the non-disease traits of already existing children by (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  30.  52
    Is There a Good Epistemological Argument Against Concept-Externalism.Brian Loar - 1998 - Philosophical Issues 9:213-217.
  31.  60
    Hedonistic Persons. The Good Man Argument in Plato's Philebus.Amber Danielle Carpenter - 2006 - British Journal for the History of Philosophy 14 (1):5 – 26.
  32.  45
    A Bad Argument for Good Reasons.Robert Nadeau - 1993 - International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 7 (1):69 – 73.
    1. In general we agree to recognize the existence, if not the methodological fertility or epistemological legitimacy, of a "rationalist model," at least when we refer to what economists do when they offer explanations.1 However two remarks must be made about this. First, it must be emphasized that this model is not unique, but generic: in fact, it is more a family of models of which the fundamental theoretical suppositions are susceptible to large variations. There are here, as it were, (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  33. These May Be Good Times: An Argument That Things Are Getting Better.Ben Levin - 2008 - In Ciaran Sugrue (ed.), The Future of Educational Change: International Perspectives. Routledge. pp. 34.
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  34. The Nature of Moral Reasoning: The Framework and Activities of Ethical Deliberation, Argument and Decision-Making; the President of Good and Evil: The Ethics of George W. Bush.Michael Schwartz - 2006 - Business Ethics Quarterly 16 (4):617-622.
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  35. Is Good Tragedy Possible? The Argument of Plato's Gorgias 502b-503b.Franco V. Trivigno - 2011 - Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 41:115-138.
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  36.  32
    The Deductive Argument From Evil.Bruce R. Reichenbach - 1981 - Sophia 20 (1):221--227.
    First, I consider J.L. Mackie's deductive argument from evil, noting that required modifications to his premises, especially those dealing with what it is to be a good person and omnipotence, do not entail that God would be required to eliminate evil completely. Hence, no contradiction exists between God's existence, possession of certain properties, and the existence of evil. Second I evaluate McCloskey's arguments against reasons for evil often suggested by the theist: that evil is a means to achieving (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  37.  4
    Are There Any Good Reasons?Danny Frederick - manuscript
    David Miller argues that there are no good reasons, either sufficient or insufficient. I show that most of his arguments are invalid or unsound. Several of his arguments depend upon the false claim that every deductively valid argument is circular. I accept one of Miller's arguments for the conclusion that there are no good reasons which are less-than-sufficient. I accept one of his arguments to the conclusion that there are no probative sufficient reasons. But I explain how (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  38.  45
    The Virtuous Troll: Argumentative Virtues in the Age of Argumentative Pluralism.Daniel Cohen - 2017 - Philosophy and Technology 30 (2):179-189.
    Technology has made argumentation rampant. We can argue whenever we want. With social media venues for every interest, we can also argue about whatever we want. To some extent, we can select our opponents and audiences to argue with whomever we want. And we can argue however we want, whether in carefully reasoned, article-length expositions, real-time exchanges, or 140-character polemics. The concepts of arguing, arguing well, and even being an arguer have evolved with this new multiplicity and diversity; theory needs (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  39.  15
    Attributed Favourable Relevance and Argument Evaluation.Derek Allen - 1996 - Informal Logic 18 (2).
    I criticize a case made by George Bowles for a certain theory pertaining to the evaluation of arguments on which the (degree of) attributed favourable relevance of an argument's premises to its conclusion is relevant to its evaluation, but nevertheless argue that such favourable relevance is indeed relevant to an argument's evaluation.
    Direct download (11 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  40. The Argument to God From Fine-Tuning.Richard Swinburne - 2010 - In Science and Religion in Dialogue. Wiley-Blackwell. pp. 223--233.
    This chapter contains sections titled: * Fine-Tuning * Notes.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  41. The Carpenter and the Good.Rachel Barney - 2008 - In D. Cairns, F. G. Herrmann & T. Penner (eds.), Pursuing the Good: Ethics and Metaphysics in Plato's Republic. University of Edinburgh.
    Among Aristotle’s criticisms of the Form of the Good is his claim that the knowledge of such a Good could be of no practical relevance to everyday rational agency, e.g. on the part of craftspeople. This critique turns out to hinge ultimately on the deeply different assumptions made by Plato and Aristotle about the relation of ‘good’ and ‘good for’. Plato insists on the conceptual priority of the former; and Plato wins the argument.
    Direct download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  42. Identifying Goodness.Charles R. Pigden - 2012 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 90 (1):93 - 109.
    The paper reconstructs Moore's Open Question Argument (OQA) and discusses its rise and fall. There are three basic objections to the OQA: Geach's point, that Moore presupposes that ?good? is a predicative adjective (whereas it is in fact attributive); Lewy's point, that it leads straight to the Paradox of Analysis; and Durrant's point that even if 'good' is not synonymous with any naturalistic predicate, goodness might be synthetically identical with a naturalistic property. As against Geach, I argue (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  43. Kant on ‘Good’, the Good, and the Duty to Promote the Highest Good.Pauline Kleingeld - 2016 - In Thomas Höwing (ed.), The Highest Good in Kant’s Philosophy. Berlin: De Gruyter. pp. 33-50.
    Many regard Kant’s account of the highest good as a failure. His inclusion of happiness in the highest good, in combination with his claim that it is a duty to promote the highest good, is widely seen as inconsistent. In this essay, I argue that there is a valid argument, based on premises Kant clearly endorses, in defense of his thesis that it is a duty to promote the highest good. I first examine why Kant (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  44.  24
    BankXX: Supporting Legal Arguments Through Heuristic Retrieval. [REVIEW]Edwina L. Rissland, David B. Skalak & M. Timur Friedman - 1996 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 4 (1):1-71.
    The BankXX system models the process of perusing and gathering information for argument as a heuristic best-first search for relevant cases, theories, and other domain-specific information. As BankXX searches its heterogeneous and highly interconnected network of domain knowledge, information is incrementally analyzed and amalgamated into a dozen desirable ingredients for argument (called argument pieces), such as citations to cases, applications of legal theories, and references to prototypical factual scenarios. At the conclusion of the search, BankXX outputs the (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  45. Why the Ultimate Argument for Scientific Realism Ultimately Fails.Moti Mizrahi - 2012 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 43 (1):132-138.
    In this paper, I argue that the ultimate argument for Scientific Realism, also known as the No-Miracles Argument (NMA), ultimately fails as an abductive defence of Epistemic Scientific Realism (ESR), where (ESR) is the thesis that successful theories of mature sciences are approximately true. The NMA is supposed to be an Inference to the Best Explanation (IBE) that purports to explain the success of science. However, the explanation offered as the best explanation for success, namely (ESR), fails to (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   24 citations  
  46. The Argument From Underconsideration and Relative Realism.Moti Mizrahi - 2013 - International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 27 (4):393-407.
    In this article, through a critical examination of K. Brad Wray's version of the argument from underconsideration against scientific realism, I articulate a modest version of scientific realism. This modest realist position, which I call ‘relative realism’, preserves the scientific realist's optimism about science's ability to get closer to the truth while, at the same time, taking on board the antirealist's premise that theory evaluation is comparative, and thus that there are no good reasons to think that science's (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   12 citations  
  47. The Concept of Ergon: Towards An Achievement Interpretation of Aristotle's 'Function Argument'.Samuel H. Baker - 2015 - Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 48:227-266.
    In Nicomachean Ethics 1. 7, Aristotle gives a definition of the human good, and he does so by means of the “ ergon argument.” I clear the way for a new interpretation of this argument by arguing that Aristotle does not think that the ergon of something is always the proper activity of that thing. Though he has a single concept of an ergon, Aristotle identifies the ergon of an X as an activity in some cases but (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  48.  43
    On the Priority of Agent-Based Argumentative Norms.David Godden - 2016 - Topoi 35 (2):345-357.
    This paper argues against the priority of pure, virtue-based accounts of argumentative norms [VA]. Such accounts are agent-based and committed to the priority thesis: good arguments and arguing well are explained in terms of some prior notion of the virtuous arguer arguing virtuously. Two problems with the priority thesis are identified. First, the definitional problem: virtuous arguers arguing virtuously are neither sufficient nor necessary for good arguments. Second, the priority problem: the goodness of arguments is not explained virtuistically. (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  49. Aristotle's Argument for a Human Function.Rachel Barney - 2008 - Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 34:293-322.
    A generally ignored feature of Aristotle’s famous function argument is its reliance on the claim that practitioners of the crafts (technai) have functions: but this claim does important work. Aristotle is pointing to the fact that we judge everyday rational agency and agents by norms which are independent of their contingent desires: a good doctor is not just one who happens to achieve his personal goals through his work. But, Aristotle argues, such norms can only be binding on (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  50. Is Anything Just Plain Good?Mahrad Almotahari & Adam Hosein - 2015 - Philosophical Studies 172 (6):1485-1508.
    Geach and Thomson have argued that nothing is just plain good, because ‘good’ is, logically, an attributive adjective. The upshot, according to Geach and Thomson, is that consequentialism is unacceptable, since its very formulation requires a predicative use of ‘good’. Reactions to the argument have, for the most part, been uniform. Authors have converged on two challenging objections . First, although the logical tests that Geach and Thomson invoke clearly illustrate that ‘good’, as commonly used, (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
1 — 50 / 1000