Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Arts and Humanities
Employing And Exploiting The Presumptions Of Communication In Argumentation: An Application Of Normative Pragmatics, Scott Jacobs
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 are …
Commentary On: Frank Zenkers’S “The Polysemy Of ‘Fallacy’– Or ‘Bias’, For That Matter”, Michel Dufour
Commentary On: Frank Zenkers’S “The Polysemy Of ‘Fallacy’– Or ‘Bias’, For That Matter”, Michel Dufour
OSSA Conference Archive
No abstract provided.
“Strategically Wrong”: Bias And Argumentation, Cristian Santibanez Yanez
“Strategically Wrong”: Bias And Argumentation, Cristian Santibanez Yanez
OSSA Conference Archive
The brain is composed of mutually inconsistent modules that contain contradictory beliefs. What consequences could this view have on argumentation? In order to sketch an answer, first the family of concepts of what is called generalized deception is discussed; then, this discussion is applied to the problem of the social influence bias to observe both how the mind works strategically wrong and what kind of arguments are used within this mental design in a social argumentative context.