Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- N/A (99)
- Argumentation (64)
- Argument (32)
- Rhetoric (28)
- Critical thinking (25)
-
- Objectivity (20)
- Bias (19)
- Persuasion (14)
- Fallacy (13)
- Deep disagreement (12)
- Evidence (12)
- Logic (12)
- Deliberation (11)
- Pragma-dialectics (11)
- Fallacies (10)
- Inference (10)
- Reasoning (10)
- Virtue (10)
- Walton (10)
- Dialogue (9)
- Relevance (9)
- Testimony (9)
- Argument evaluation (8)
- Conductive argument (8)
- Practical reasoning (8)
- Trust (8)
- Argumentation schemes (7)
- Argumentation theory (7)
- Audience (7)
- Dialectic (7)
- Publication Year
Articles 1501 - 1529 of 1529
Full-Text Articles in Arts and Humanities
Commentary On Matthewson, Jacqueline Macgregor Davies
Commentary On Matthewson, Jacqueline Macgregor Davies
OSSA Conference Archive
No abstract provided.
Outdoing Lewis Carrol: Judicial Rhetoric And Acceptable Fictions, Gwen C. Matthewson
Outdoing Lewis Carrol: Judicial Rhetoric And Acceptable Fictions, Gwen C. Matthewson
OSSA Conference Archive
This paper examines the functions of narrative within written legal argumentation. My purposes are these: 1) to repudiate common assumptions that differentiate "argumentation" and "storytelling" in the law; 2) to begin to theorize anew how legal argumentation functions; 3) to explore the difficulties of evaluating the law's argumentative narratives, and 4) to trace some of the anxiety that judges themselves reveal about their roles as storytellers. I conclude that narrative is necessary to law's claims to authority, even as it complicates our understandings about how legislative policy decisions produce effects, and even as judges themselves seek to mask its importance.
Commentary On Johnson, Joseph Wenzel
Commentary On Mathie, Philippe Azzie
Commentary On Missimer, Christina Slade
Commentary On Palmer, Corrado Federici
Logic, Coherence And Psychology, Robert C. Pinto
Logic, Coherence And Psychology, Robert C. Pinto
OSSA Conference Archive
This paper will argue that (a) some notion of coherence and/or explanatory coherence is essential to understanding epistemic justification and to clarifying the rational support that our beliefs or commitments lend to each other, and that (b) the requisite notion of coherence cannot be fully explicated on the basis of logic and/or epistemology. Two candidates for explicating coherence will be examined: narrative coherence and the sort of coherence that obtains when gestalt closure is achieved. The paper will attempt to determine under what conditions acceptance that is determined or guided by these sorts of coherence can be construed as rational …
Commentary On Pinto, Jonathan Adler
Indicators Of Obiter Dicta, José Plug
Indicators Of Obiter Dicta, José Plug
OSSA Conference Archive
In addition to ratio decidendi (the necessary arguments), judges are allowed to include obiter dicta (arguments which are superfluous) in their decisions.The interpretative decision that an argument is superfluous may be justified by reference to the verbal presentation of the argument. In this paper I discuss several words and expressions that, in legal practice, are considered to be indicators of additional considerations. Starting from a pragma-dialectical characterization of additional considerations, I evaluate some examples of these cases in order to examine which words and expressions can be seen as indicators of obiter dicta.
Commentary On Powers, John Woods
Ad Hominem Arguments, Lawrence H. Powers
Ad Hominem Arguments, Lawrence H. Powers
OSSA Conference Archive
Ad hominem arguments (in one sense) argue that some opponent should not be heard and no argument of that opponent should be heard or considered. The opponent has generally pernicious views, false and harmful. Moreover he is diabolically clever at arguing for his views. Thus, the ad hominem argument is essentially a device by which non-intellectuals try to wrest control of a dialectical situation from intellectuals. Stifling intellectuals, disrupting the dialectical situation, is an unpleasant conclusion, but no fallacy has been shown in what leads up to that conclusion.
Commentary On Rehg, Marcello Guarini
Commentary On Ruhl, Jean Goodwin
Argumentation Theory And The Recent Philosophy Of Science, William Rehg
Argumentation Theory And The Recent Philosophy Of Science, William Rehg
OSSA Conference Archive
The thesis of my paper is that argumentation theory provides a promising heuristic framework for addressing issues raised by the rationality debates in the philosophy of science, in particular the issues connected with scientific controversies over the appraisal and choice of competing theories. The first part of the paper grounds this thesis historically. In criticizing the logical empiricists, Thomas Kuhn set the stage for the subsequent opposition between a normative, anti-sociological philosophy of science and a descriptive, anti-philosophical sociology of knowledge. But he also hinted at the main lines of a multi-dimensional theory of argumentation which might frame a wide …
Good Arguments And Fallacies, Bruce Russell
Good Arguments And Fallacies, Bruce Russell
OSSA Conference Archive
To understand what a fallacy is one needs to understand what a bad argument is and what it is for an argument to appear good. I will argue that from an intuitive standpoint a good argument should be understood in roughly the way Richard Feldman has proposed, that is, as an argument that gives people reason to believe its conclusion. However, I will also argue that an externalist condition that requires that the premises really do support the conclusion must be added to the internalist account which only requires that a person be justified in believing the premises support the …
The Dictates Of Reason: Bacon, Ramus, And The Naturalization Of Invention, Terri Palmer
The Dictates Of Reason: Bacon, Ramus, And The Naturalization Of Invention, Terri Palmer
OSSA Conference Archive
This paper will discuss the history of argumentation, specifically the location of the canon of invention in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. At that time, scientists, logicians, and philosophers began to seek new means of constructing and presenting arguments. New logical schemes, such as set forth by Ramus in his Logike or Bacon in the Novum Organon, attempted to place the invention and structure of arguments on a more rational, epistemologically secure basis. This paper will explore the shifts in rhetoric and logic in Bacon's and Ramus's work, with some reference to Wilson's Rule of Reason and Art of Rhetoric.
Commentary On Secor, Raymie Mckerrow
Commentary On Slade, Deborah Berrill
Mill’S Fallacies: Theory And Practice, Marie J. Secor
Mill’S Fallacies: Theory And Practice, Marie J. Secor
OSSA Conference Archive
In noting contemporary neglect of Mill's work on fallacy, Hansen and Pinto say that his account is tied more closely to scientific methodology than to problems of public discourse and everyday argumentation. This paper re-examines Mill's fallacies from a rhetorical perspective, assessing the extent to which his examples—drawn from the domain of popular superstition, science, philosophy, and public discussion—fits his theoretical structure. In articulating the relationship between Mill's philosophical assumptions and the discursive practices of the fields from which he draws his examples, it will suggest the ambiguities in Mill's mentalistic, rationalistic, inductivist approach and the inescapable rhetoricity of his …
Commentary On Snoeck-Henkemans, J Anthony Blair
Commentary On Snoeck-Henkemans, J Anthony Blair
OSSA Conference Archive
No abstract provided.
From A Critical Point Of View: News As A Soap Opera, Christina Slade
From A Critical Point Of View: News As A Soap Opera, Christina Slade
OSSA Conference Archive
Traditionally reasoning skills have been taught through written examples, often anachronistic or artificial. However, students use television as their major source of information about the world and as the source of basic understanding of the world. Yet we rarely provide students with the skills directly to criticize and analyze television's world view. This paper reports on a project designed to teach reasoning through the critical analysis of real television products. News presentation is shown to be influenced by the stereotypes and oversimplification of the genre of soap opera, to the detriment of balance.
Verbal Indicators Of Argumentation And Explanation, A Francisca Snoeck Henkemans
Verbal Indicators Of Argumentation And Explanation, A Francisca Snoeck Henkemans
OSSA Conference Archive
Linguistic descriptions of (markers of) textual relations are not always immediately relevant for providing guidelines to the analysis of argumentative discourse. This is partly due to the fact that these descriptions usually do not distinguish between argumentative and explanatory relations. The paper argues that the identification of argumentative and explanatory relations can benefit from combining insight into the use of certain specific linguistic expressions with insight into the contextual preconditions for performing the speech acts of arguing and explaining.
A Way To Describe And Evaluate Thought Experiments, Or Trying To Get A Grip On Virtual Reality, Lawrence G. Souder
A Way To Describe And Evaluate Thought Experiments, Or Trying To Get A Grip On Virtual Reality, Lawrence G. Souder
OSSA Conference Archive
The use of thought experiments seems to provoke much controversy, often in the form of charges of appeals to intuition. The notion of intuition, however, is vaguely defined in both the context of thought experiments and in philosophy in general. This vagueness suggests that the description of thought experiments is incomplete, and thus the prospect for their evaluation remains unfulfilled. Previous analyses of thought experiments have come largely from philosophy where the focus has been on truth value and validity. But these approaches seem to view argument monologically; no accommodation of an audience response like intuition is possible. I try …
Commentary On Plug, David Godden
Commentary On Thomson, Fred Kauffeld
Commentary On Vorobej, David Birdsell
Commentary On Woods, Robert C. Pinto
Commentary On Yanal, Robert W. Binkley
Argument And Conviction, Robert J. Yanal
Argument And Conviction, Robert J. Yanal
OSSA Conference Archive
Shouldn't we be convinced by good (valid) arguments and not by bad ones? But there are valid arguments with true premises that are not known to be true. What we minimally expect is that people follow the logic of the argument. How will they do this? Descartes advised us to perceive clearly and distinctly the steps in the argument. Aristotle looked toward the enthymeme so that the audience would draw the conclusion on their own. These 'thinking through' strategies are an aid to conviction but cannot guarantee it. Do we need the fallacies and other dirty tricks of rhetoric after …