Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Arts and Humanities Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 30 of 1249

Full-Text Articles in Arts and Humanities

Commentary On: “Ad Stuprum: The Fallacy Of Appeal To Sex”, Maureen Linker May 2016

Commentary On: “Ad Stuprum: The Fallacy Of Appeal To Sex”, Maureen Linker

OSSA Conference Archive

No abstract provided.


Commentary On Andrew Aberdein’S “Virtue Argumentation And Bias”, John Anthony Blair May 2016

Commentary On Andrew Aberdein’S “Virtue Argumentation And Bias”, John Anthony Blair

OSSA Conference Archive

No abstract provided.


Commentary On Rania El Nakkouzi: “Legitimizing Past Actions Through Appeals To Moral Values”, Jeff Noonan May 2016

Commentary On Rania El Nakkouzi: “Legitimizing Past Actions Through Appeals To Moral Values”, Jeff Noonan

OSSA Conference Archive

No abstract provided.


Studying Rhetorical Audiences, Jens E. Kjeldsen May 2016

Studying Rhetorical Audiences, Jens E. Kjeldsen

OSSA Conference Archive

In rhetoric and argumentation research studies of empirical audiences are rare. Most studies are speaker- or text focussed. However, new media and new forms of communication make it harder to distinguish between speaker and audience. The active involvement of users and audiences is more important than ever before. Therefore, this paper argues that rhetorical research should reconsider the understanding, conceptualization and examination of the rhetorical audience. From mostly understanding audiences as theoretical constructions that are examined textually and speculatively, we should give more attention to empirical explorations of actual audiences and users.


Latin American Philosophers: Some Recent Challenges To Their Intellectual Character, Susana Nuccetelli May 2016

Latin American Philosophers: Some Recent Challenges To Their Intellectual Character, Susana Nuccetelli

OSSA Conference Archive

No abstract provided.


Employing And Exploiting The Presumptions Of Communication In Argumentation: An Application Of Normative Pragmatics, Scott Jacobs May 2016

Employing And Exploiting The Presumptions Of Communication In Argumentation: An Application Of Normative Pragmatics, Scott Jacobs

OSSA Conference Archive

Argumentation occurs through and as communicative activity. Communication (and therefore argumentation) is organized by pragmatic principles of expression and interpretation. Grice’s (1975) theory of conversational implicature provides a model for how people use rational principles to manage the ways in which they reason to representations of arguments, and not just reason from those representations. These principles are systematic biases that make possible reasonable decision-making and intersubjective understandings in the first place; but they also make possible all manner of errors and abuses. Much of what is problematic in argumentation involves the ways in which the pragmatic principles of communication ...


Commentary On Trudy Govier’S “Some Outstanding Questions About Analogies”, Marcello Guarini May 2016

Commentary On Trudy Govier’S “Some Outstanding Questions About Analogies”, Marcello Guarini

OSSA Conference Archive

No abstract provided.


Commentary On A Perspective Of Objectivity In The Human Rights Arguments, Danny Marrero May 2016

Commentary On A Perspective Of Objectivity In The Human Rights Arguments, Danny Marrero

OSSA Conference Archive

No abstract provided.


Commentary On 'Pursuing Objectivity: How Virtuous Can You Get?', William R. Minto May 2016

Commentary On 'Pursuing Objectivity: How Virtuous Can You Get?', William R. Minto

OSSA Conference Archive

No abstract provided.


Commentary On Arguments From Expert Opinion And Persistent Bias, John Fields May 2016

Commentary On Arguments From Expert Opinion And Persistent Bias, John Fields

OSSA Conference Archive

No abstract provided.


Commentary On Ralph H. Johnson’S “On Distinguishing Between An Objection And A Criticism”, Jan Albert Van Laar May 2016

Commentary On Ralph H. Johnson’S “On Distinguishing Between An Objection And A Criticism”, Jan Albert Van Laar

OSSA Conference Archive

No abstract provided.


Commentary On 'Acts Of Ostension', Paul L. Simard Smith May 2016

Commentary On 'Acts Of Ostension', Paul L. Simard Smith

OSSA Conference Archive

No abstract provided.


Commentary On “Eliminating Gender-, Racial- And Age-Biases In Medical Diagnostic Reasoning”, Steve Oswald May 2016

Commentary On “Eliminating Gender-, Racial- And Age-Biases In Medical Diagnostic Reasoning”, Steve Oswald

OSSA Conference Archive

No abstract provided.


Commentary On Visser On Computer Support For Pragma-Dialectic Argumentation Analysis, Ami Mamolo May 2016

Commentary On Visser On Computer Support For Pragma-Dialectic Argumentation Analysis, Ami Mamolo

OSSA Conference Archive

No abstract provided.


Commentary On "What Should A Normative Theory Of Argument Look Like?", David Zarefsky May 2016

Commentary On "What Should A Normative Theory Of Argument Look Like?", David Zarefsky

OSSA Conference Archive

No abstract provided.


Commentary On “A Three-Dimensional Analysis Of Definition With Bearing On Key Concepts” By Robert Ennis, Kevin Possin May 2016

Commentary On “A Three-Dimensional Analysis Of Definition With Bearing On Key Concepts” By Robert Ennis, Kevin Possin

OSSA Conference Archive

On the nature of definitions and concepts, and the definition of critical thinking.


Commentary On "Two-Wise And Three-Wise Similarity, And Non-Deductive Analogical Arguments", Ian Dove May 2016

Commentary On "Two-Wise And Three-Wise Similarity, And Non-Deductive Analogical Arguments", Ian Dove

OSSA Conference Archive

No abstract provided.


Commentary On: Frank Zenkers’S “The Polysemy Of ‘Fallacy’– Or ‘Bias’, For That Matter”, Michel Dufour May 2016

Commentary On: Frank Zenkers’S “The Polysemy Of ‘Fallacy’– Or ‘Bias’, For That Matter”, Michel Dufour

OSSA Conference Archive

No abstract provided.


Commentary On Daniel Cohen And Katharina Stevens' "Virtuous Vices: On Objectivity And Bias In Argumentation", Tone Kvernbekk May 2016

Commentary On Daniel Cohen And Katharina Stevens' "Virtuous Vices: On Objectivity And Bias In Argumentation", Tone Kvernbekk

OSSA Conference Archive

No abstract provided.


Commentary On Patrick Bondy, “Bias In Legitimate Ad Hominem Arguments”, Andrew Aberdein May 2016

Commentary On Patrick Bondy, “Bias In Legitimate Ad Hominem Arguments”, Andrew Aberdein

OSSA Conference Archive

No abstract provided.


Commentary On "Walton's Argumentation Schemes", Michael D. Kurak May 2016

Commentary On "Walton's Argumentation Schemes", Michael D. Kurak

OSSA Conference Archive

No abstract provided.


Commentary On Emotional Arguments: What Would Neuroscientists And Psychologists Say? By Linda Carozza, Ioana A. Cionea May 2016

Commentary On Emotional Arguments: What Would Neuroscientists And Psychologists Say? By Linda Carozza, Ioana A. Cionea

OSSA Conference Archive

No abstract provided.


Commentary On ‘Levels Of Depth In Deep Disagreement’, Tim Kenyon May 2016

Commentary On ‘Levels Of Depth In Deep Disagreement’, Tim Kenyon

OSSA Conference Archive

No abstract provided.


Commentary On “The Method Of Relevant Variables, Objectivity, And Bias”, Andrei Moldovan May 2016

Commentary On “The Method Of Relevant Variables, Objectivity, And Bias”, Andrei Moldovan

OSSA Conference Archive

No abstract provided.


Commentary On Constructing A Periodic Table Of Arguments, Yun Xie May 2016

Commentary On Constructing A Periodic Table Of Arguments, Yun Xie

OSSA Conference Archive

This is the Commentary on Wagemans' paper "Constructing a Periodic Table of Arguments".


Commentary On "Mapping Objectivity And Bias In Relation To Argument", Justine M. Kingsbury May 2016

Commentary On "Mapping Objectivity And Bias In Relation To Argument", Justine M. Kingsbury

OSSA Conference Archive

No abstract provided.


Commentary On G. Thomas Goodnight’S “Blind Spots, Moral Hazards & Wounded Narratives”, Christopher W. Tindale, Christopher W. Tindale May 2016

Commentary On G. Thomas Goodnight’S “Blind Spots, Moral Hazards & Wounded Narratives”, Christopher W. Tindale, Christopher W. Tindale

OSSA Conference Archive

No abstract provided.


Levels Of Depth In Deep Disagreement, Claudio Duran May 2016

Levels Of Depth In Deep Disagreement, Claudio Duran

OSSA Conference Archive

The concept of deep disagreement was introduced by Richard Fogelin in a 1985 paper published in Critical Thinking. Since then, about 12 papers have been published in journals or presented in conferences on argumentation theory.

All these papers relate back to the initial Fogelin paper. Andrew Lugg’s 1986 critical response to Fogelin introduces significant questions concerning his views. Peter Davson-Galle in 1992, takes a more positive approach to them. The more extensive publication on deep disagreement can be found in a 2005 issue of Critical Thinking dedicated entirely to this topic. Most of the 5 papers found here take ...


Outstanding Questions About Analogies, Trudy Govier May 2016

Outstanding Questions About Analogies, Trudy Govier

OSSA Conference Archive

I consider several outstanding questions about analogies. These include the following: (a) issues of interpretation especially with regard to whether an analogy should be considered argumentative, as distinct from serving as an illustration, explanation, or matter of rhetorical interest; (b) whether and how to draw a distinction between inductive analogies and a priori analogies; and (c) whether a priori analogies should be reconstructed as deductively valid arguments. The discussion will explore broader themes such as the distinction between the a priori and the deductive, and whether a priori analogies offer reasons for a choice, as distinct from a basis for ...


Eliminating Gender-, Racial- And Age-Biases In Medical Diagnostic Reasoning (Paper), Brian Macpherson Dr. May 2016

Eliminating Gender-, Racial- And Age-Biases In Medical Diagnostic Reasoning (Paper), Brian Macpherson Dr.

OSSA Conference Archive

Much attention has been paid in the literature to the deleterious effects of errors in diagnostic reasoning due to underlying cognitive biases. This is an important topic since people’s lives and well-being are at stake. Empirical studies cited by Chapman et al. (2013) corroborate the view that gender, racial, or age biases exist in a significant number of clinicians, thereby limiting objective diagnosis. Croskerry (2003, 2013) endorses a so-called metacognitive (or cognitive ‘forcing’) approach to achieve de-biasing in clinicians, a key component of which is critical self-reflection on one’s own diagnostic reasoning (Croskerry, 2003). However, the first empirical ...