Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 8 of 8
Full-Text Articles in Arts and Humanities
The Role Of Trust In Argumentation, Catarina Dutilh Novaes
The Role Of Trust In Argumentation, Catarina Dutilh Novaes
OSSA Conference Archive
Abstract: Argumentation is important for sharing knowledge and information. Given that the receiver of an argument purportedly engages first and foremost with its content, one might expect trust to play a negligible epistemic role, as opposed to its crucial role in testimony. I argue on the contrary that trust plays a fundamental role in argumentative engagement. I present a realistic social epistemological account of argumentation inspired by social exchange theory. Here, argumentation is a form of epistemic exchange. I illustrate my argument with two real-life examples: vaccination hesitancy, and the undermining of the credibility of traditional sources of …
Biases, Bumps, Nudges, Query Lists, And Zero Tolerance Policies, Sheldon Wein
Biases, Bumps, Nudges, Query Lists, And Zero Tolerance Policies, Sheldon Wein
OSSA Conference Archive
Zero tolerance policies are often mistakenly thought to be the best way to deal with pressing social problems. However, most arguments for zero tolerance policies are either based on inaccurate premises or they commit the zero tolerance fallacy. This paper explores ways that we might counteract the bias in favor of zero tolerance policies by adding a query list to the choice architecture.
Another Dimension To Deep Disagreements: Trust In Argumentation, Moira L. Kloster
Another Dimension To Deep Disagreements: Trust In Argumentation, Moira L. Kloster
OSSA Conference Archive
I will connect the literature on deep disagreements with the literature on trust to construct a two-dimensional picture of the limits of argument. Argumentation and trust are important to the functioning of society, but each sets different expectations for when arguments can and should be used to resolve disagreements. When trust is factored in, we see a more nuanced picture of which disagreements will remain too deep for objective argument. Affective and social aspects of argument are not independent of procedure and content.
Demonstrating Objectivity In Controversial Science Communication: A Case Study Of Gmo Scientist Kevin Folta, Jean Goodwin
Demonstrating Objectivity In Controversial Science Communication: A Case Study Of Gmo Scientist Kevin Folta, Jean Goodwin
OSSA Conference Archive
Scientists can find it difficult to be seen as objective within the chaos of a civic controversy. This paper gives a normative pragmatic account of the strategy one GMO scientist used to demonstrate his trustworthiness. Kevin Folta made his talk expensive by undertaking to answer all questions, and carried out this responsibility by acting as if every comment addressed to him—even the most hostile—was in fact a question in good faith. This presumption of audience good faith gave in turn his audience good reason to presume his good faith, and a situation of reciprocal distrust was transformed into one with …
Pistis - The Common Ethos?, Anne-Maren Andersen
Pistis - The Common Ethos?, Anne-Maren Andersen
OSSA Conference Archive
The classical Greek term pistis (trust) is presented as a relevant norm in the analysis of parliamentary debate. Through exploration of pistis apparent similarities to the term ethos have appeared. It is proposed that pistis can be viewed as the equivalent to ethos, concerning the common space or connection between the speaker and the audience. Tentatively "truth", "faith" and "respect" are proposed as the elements equivalent to phronesis, areté and eunoia.
The Virtue Of Restraint: Rebalancing Power In Arguments, Moira Kloster
The Virtue Of Restraint: Rebalancing Power In Arguments, Moira Kloster
OSSA Conference Archive
Is argument a game everyone should be able to play? If it is, current argument practices do not yet level the playing field enough for a fair game. We may build in subtle imbalances that work against people who cannot easily adapt to the most common patterns of argumentative interaction. We need better ways to build trust, to create safety, and adapt goals in order to bring everyone into the game.
Trust, Distrust, And Trustworthiness In Argumentation: Virtues And Fallacies, Suzanne Mcmurphy
Trust, Distrust, And Trustworthiness In Argumentation: Virtues And Fallacies, Suzanne Mcmurphy
OSSA Conference Archive
What is trust? How does it function as a primary virtue for persuasive arguments? How does its presumption contribute to the effectiveness of an argument’s persuasiveness? This presentation will explore these questions and the controversy among scholars regarding how trust is generated and under what conditions it is lost. We will also discuss whether inauthentic trustworthiness is a manipulation used for gaining a fallacious advantage in argumentation.
Accounting For The Force Of The Appeal To Authority, Jean Goodwin, Raymie Mckerrow
Accounting For The Force Of The Appeal To Authority, Jean Goodwin, Raymie Mckerrow
OSSA Conference Archive
As appeals to expert authority shift from “fallacies” to “argument schemes,” argumentation theorists are called on to provide critical questions for assessing them. I argue that current treatments focus too heavily on assessing expertise, and not enough on judging trustworthiness. I propose instead a norma-tive pragmatic account of the rational force of the appeal to expert authority, one that emphasizes the ex-pert's actions in constructing his/her own legitimate trustworthiness.