Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Publication Year
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 30 of 47
Full-Text Articles in Arts and Humanities
Commentary On Mckeon On Argument, Inference, And Persuasion, Daniel H. Cohen
Commentary On Mckeon On Argument, Inference, And Persuasion, Daniel H. Cohen
OSSA Conference Archive
No abstract provided.
Argument, Inference, And Persuasion, Matthew W. Mckeon
Argument, Inference, And Persuasion, Matthew W. Mckeon
OSSA Conference Archive
I move beyond Pinto’s (2001) discussion of arguments as invitations to inference by highlighting how arguments can guide the performance of inferences that they do not express. This motivates a distinction between two types of persuasive force arguments can have in terms of two different connections between arguments and inferences. I use this distinction to explain how an epistemically bad argument can rationally persuade addressees of its conclusion.
Commentary On: Tony Blair’S “The Persuasive Ineffectiveness Of Arguing And Arguments”, Michel Dufour
Commentary On: Tony Blair’S “The Persuasive Ineffectiveness Of Arguing And Arguments”, Michel Dufour
OSSA Conference Archive
No abstract provided.
The Persuasive Ineffectiveness Of Arguing And Arguments, J. Anthony Blair
The Persuasive Ineffectiveness Of Arguing And Arguments, J. Anthony Blair
OSSA Conference Archive
Arguments intended to persuade have a chequered success record. Quite aside from failing to resolve deep disagreements, they are an inefficient means of persuasion in commerce and politics. The persistence of competing schools of thought in numerous fields of scientific and scholarly theorizing, despite argued advocacy, also raises questions about arguing’s persuasive effectiveness. Yet humans are irredeemably reason-expecting and reason-giving creatures. This paper offers some possible explanations of this paradoxical situation.
Commentary On: Jianfeng Wang’S “Deep Disagreement, Deep Rhetoric, And Cultural Diversity", Jean Goodwin
Commentary On: Jianfeng Wang’S “Deep Disagreement, Deep Rhetoric, And Cultural Diversity", Jean Goodwin
OSSA Conference Archive
In this cogent paper, Wang urges argumentation theorists to pay attention to the myriad things that are happening whenever someone makes an argument. To do this he updates and extends the classical rhetorical cannon of style. He documents the importance of argumentative style through a case study of deep disagreement, showing how one arguer’s choices served to reconstruct an otherwise abusive situation. I urge him to continue the project by providing an equally cogent account of explaining why an arguer’s stylistic choices lead to the desired audience’s response.
Diversity, Conflict Resolution, And (Dis)Agreement, Linda Carozza
Diversity, Conflict Resolution, And (Dis)Agreement, Linda Carozza
OSSA Conference Archive
Is reaching an agreement a product of strong arguing-making and argument-having? Mediators are trained to be neutral facilitators with a range of diverse strategies for resolving disagreements. In spite of this, parties in conflict can derail a mediator’s trajectory in helping all involved by i) understand different positions and especially ii) develop resolutions. Borrowing from the literature of conflict resolution this paper questions the efficacy of critical-logical normative argumentation models.
The Logical Fallacies In Political Discourse, Zilin Cidre Zhou
The Logical Fallacies In Political Discourse, Zilin Cidre Zhou
Summer Research Program
I examined the use of logical fallacies in political discourse. Logical fallacies are fraudulent tricks people use in their argument to make it sound more credible while what they really do is to fool the audience. Out of more than 300 kinds of fallacies, I focused on 18 common ones by analyzing their use in debates about political issues. During conducting my research, I noted that being aware of my mental state is very important if I want to accurately detect the fallacies. Furthermore, while watching two sides debating, being impartial is as significant as staying calm. I also need …
Against The Intentional Definition Of Argument, G. C. Goddu
Against The Intentional Definition Of Argument, G. C. Goddu
Philosophy Faculty Publications
Intentional definitions of argument, i.e. the conclusion being intended to follow from the premises, abound. Yet, there are numerous problem cases in which we appear to have arguments, but no intention. One way to try to avoid these problem cases is to appeal to acts, in which case one has to give up on the repeatability of arguments. One can keep repeatability and intentions if one resorts to act types, but then it appears that the problem cases re-emerge.
"Hail Mary, Full Of Haze": Physicalism And The Knowledge Argument, Jesse R. Powell
"Hail Mary, Full Of Haze": Physicalism And The Knowledge Argument, Jesse R. Powell
Honors College Theses
This project aims to provide a clear and compelling reason for rejecting dualism with respect to the mind, by undermining the support dualist positions receive from so-called knowledge arguments. In particular, I will show the error present in the many forms of what is variously called the “Mary’s Room” or “Mary the Brilliant Color Scientist” thought experiment.
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 …
Commentary On Ami Mamolo On Argumentation And Infinity, Daniel H. Cohen
Commentary On Ami Mamolo On Argumentation And Infinity, Daniel H. Cohen
OSSA Conference Archive
There is more to mathematics than proofs; there are also arguments, which means that mathematicians are human arguers complete with their biases. Among those biases is a preference for beauty, It is a bias insofar as it is a deaprture from objectivity, but it is benign, accounting for the popularity of Cantor's "Paradise" of non-denumerable infinities as a travel destination for mathematicians and the relatively little interest in Robinson's infinitesimals.
Commentary On Michael Yong-Set's Ludological Approach To Argumentation, Daniel H. Cohen
Commentary On Michael Yong-Set's Ludological Approach To Argumentation, Daniel H. Cohen
OSSA Conference Archive
Although Michael Yong-Set's proposal to approach argumentation theory from a ludological perspective is not yet sufficiently developed to warrant adopting it, there is enough to warrant exploring it further – which is all the reception it needs at this point.
On The Very Concept Of An Enthymeme, G.C. Goddu
On The Very Concept Of An Enthymeme, G.C. Goddu
OSSA Conference Archive
An enthymeme is often defined as an argument with a missing component or an argument with an unexpressed component. Roy Sorensen, in “Are Enthymemes Arguments?”, argues against the possibility of enthymemes being arguments at all, but he assumes that arguments are abstract objects. I shall present and explore some more metaphysically neutral arguments against enthymemes as arguments and ultimately conclude that while not conclusive, the most viable option is Sorensen’s—enthymemes are not arguments.
Definition: A Three-Dimensional Analysis With Bearing On Key Concepts, Robert H. Ennis Phd
Definition: A Three-Dimensional Analysis With Bearing On Key Concepts, Robert H. Ennis Phd
OSSA Conference Archive
This essay presents a three-dimensional analysis of definition (form, stance, and content) with application to making and evaluating definitions; teaching how to define; avoiding equivocation with "argument" and "bias"; and, using the concept-conception distinction, avoiding being deterred by the many definitions of "critical thinking", and seeing the usefulness of objectivity in everyday arguments in spite of existing conflict and confusion about aspects of objectivity.
Argument Objectivity And Ontological/Logical Pluralism: Must Arguments Be Domain Sensitive?, Philip Rose
Argument Objectivity And Ontological/Logical Pluralism: Must Arguments Be Domain Sensitive?, Philip Rose
OSSA Conference Archive
The idea of ontological/logical pluralism raises an interesting question about the objectivity of arguments and argument forms: Are all arguments and argument forms domain dependent? In his recent work Bruno Latour outlines a radical form of ontological pluralism in which each domain or “mode of existence” has its own set of “felicity conditions” that serve as “veridiction” conditions unique to that mode. To “speak well” requires that one speak in the “interpretive key” proper to each mode. Since there is no “meta-language” that crosses all modes, then all modes must be assessed using the felicity or veridiction conditions peculiar to …
The Normative Significance Of Deep Disagreement, Tim Dare
The Normative Significance Of Deep Disagreement, Tim Dare
OSSA Conference Archive
Some normative problems are difficult because of the number and complexity of the issues they involve. Rational resolution might be hard but it seems at least possible. Other problems are not merely complex and multi-faceted but ‘deep’. They have a logical structure that precludes rational resolution. Treatments of deep disagreement often hint at sinister implications. If doubt is cast on our 'final vocabulary', writes Richard Rorty, we are left with "no noncircular argumentative recourse .... [B]eyond them there is only helpless passivity or a resort to force.” I will argue that some normative problems are deep, but that we need …
Why We Still Do Not Know What A “Real” Argument Is, G. C. Goddu
Why We Still Do Not Know What A “Real” Argument Is, G. C. Goddu
Philosophy Faculty Publications
In his recent paper, “What a Real Argument is,” Ben Hamby attempts to provide an adequate theoretical account of “real” arguments. In this paper I present and evaluate both Hamby’s motivation for distinguishing “real” from non-“real” arguments and his articulation of the distinction. I argue that neither is adequate to ground a theoretically significant class of “real” arguments, for the articulation fails to pick out a stable proper subclass of all arguments that is simultaneously both theoretically relevant and a proper subclass of all arguments.
Arguing With God: An Honest Conversation, Barry Fike
Arguing With God: An Honest Conversation, Barry Fike
Barry D. Fike
For the Jew, “I beg to differ” has been an enduring tactic of achieving and affirming identity. The Jew had addressed the same caveat to God—not in self-contradiction, but in dialectic aiming at attainment of fuller realization of who he is, as Jew and as human being. In asking about God, we examine our own selves: whether we are sensitive to the grandeur and supremacy of what we ask about, whether we are wholeheartedly concerned with what we ask about. Unless we are involved, we fail to sense the issue.
Are Conductive Arguments Really Not Possible?, J. Anthony Blair
Are Conductive Arguments Really Not Possible?, J. Anthony Blair
OSSA Conference Archive
In “Are conductive arguments possible?” Jonathan Adler argued that conductive argu-ments (those balancing considerations for a claim, C, against counter-considerations against C) are not possible because they are committed to two incompatible propositions: (I) C is reached without nullifying the counter-considerations; (II) C is accepted is true, which issues in belief, so C is detached from these premises. This paper offers an analysis and an assessment of Adler’s case for his thesis.
The Practice Of Arguing And The Arguments: Examples From Mathematics, Begoῆa Carrascal
The Practice Of Arguing And The Arguments: Examples From Mathematics, Begoῆa Carrascal
OSSA Conference Archive
In argumentation studies, almost all theoretical proposals are applied, in general, to the analysis and evaluation of written argumentative texts. I will consider mathematics to illustrate some differences between argumentative practice and the products of it, to emphasize the need to address the different types of argumentative discourse and argumentative situation. Argumentative practice should be encouraged when teaching technical subjects to convey a better understanding and to improve thought and creativity.
Argument And Explanation In Mathematics, Michel Dufour
Argument And Explanation In Mathematics, Michel Dufour
OSSA Conference Archive
Are there arguments in mathematics? Are there explanations in mathematics? Are there any connections between argument, proof and explanation? Highly controversial answers and arguments are reviewed. The main point is that in the case of a mathematical proof, the pragmatic criterion used to make a distinction between argument and explanation is likely to be insufficient for you may grant the conclusion of a proof but keep on thinking that the proof is not explanatory.
Why I Still Do Not Know What A "Real" Argument Is, G C. Goddu
Why I Still Do Not Know What A "Real" Argument Is, G C. Goddu
OSSA Conference Archive
In his recent paper, “What a Real Argument is” Ben Hamby attempts to provide an adequate theoretical account of what a “real” argument is. I argue that if the definition picks out a stable class of arguments, such a class is either not theoretically relevant or is not capturing the class of arguments that Hamby intends.
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.
The Language And Diagramming Of Rejection And Objection, Cathal Woods
The Language And Diagramming Of Rejection And Objection, Cathal Woods
OSSA Conference Archive
Understanding the language of rejections and objections is an important part of the analysis and practice of argument. In order to strengthen this understanding, we might turn to diagramming, as it has been shown to have the virtue of improving critical thinking skills. This paper discusses what reliable meaning can be taken from words and phrases related to rejections and objections, and then how to diagram them.
Exploring The Meaning Of Agurment In China, Yun Xie, Dale Hample, Shuying Shi, Sarah Evans
Exploring The Meaning Of Agurment In China, Yun Xie, Dale Hample, Shuying Shi, Sarah Evans
OSSA Conference Archive
This paper aims to explore the meaning of the English word argument in Chinese culture and language. It first reviews the various definitions and concepts of argument in western literature and Chinese culture. Next, it argues that there is no one single all-encompassing word in Chinese that can fully represent all the meanings of the English word argument. Finally, it conducts a survey research to get the possible Chinese translations of the English word argument.
Norms Of Advocacy, Jean Goodwin
Norms Of Advocacy, Jean Goodwin
OSSA Conference Archive
This essay advances an account of the ordinary speech activity of advocating. The ethical principles developed within advocacy professions such as law and public relations show that advocates are not just out to persuade. Instead, they undertake obligations to make the best case for their positions while also maintaining the integrity of the communication systems within which they operate. While not offering full justifications, advocates nevertheless help auditors by making conspicuous the outer bounds of the arguable.
Logic, Truth And Inquiry (Book Review), G. C. Goddu
Logic, Truth And Inquiry (Book Review), G. C. Goddu
Philosophy Faculty Publications
Mark Weinstein’s, Logic, Truth and Inquiry is an ambitious and provocative case for a theory of truth and warrant strength that will undergird an “account of argument in the broad sense of current argumentation theory” (p. 12). I begin with a very schematic synopsis of Weinstein’s rich discussion through his six chapters. Weinstein himself notes that his arguments are “frequently presented in broad outline” (p. 1), so my quick sketch will be even broader. I conclude with some brief observations about both what the book leaves unresolved and the merits of Weinstein’s intriguing book.
Sifting The Commonplace: Topoi And The Grounds For Argument In Classical And Modern Rhetoric, Daniel Verlo Cutshaw
Sifting The Commonplace: Topoi And The Grounds For Argument In Classical And Modern Rhetoric, Daniel Verlo Cutshaw
English Theses & Dissertations
This dissertation is a reminder that how we consider reasoning to work and its end is very much bound up with how we think about people, what they are, what they can be, and how they do and should live together. Part of the end of the human being is to understand, to understand the Good or God and thus understand herself and her relation to others and her obligation to others; this is something we see in Aristotle's somewhat-spiritual understanding of Ethics and the Human Being. Focusing on reasoning (and its connection to being) in general, instead of accenting …
Arguments By Analogy, Matt Donner
Arguments By Analogy, Matt Donner
Philosophy
This paper is an inquiry into the largely unexamined analysis of arguments by analogy (ABA). By exposing the degree of philosophical complexity, which ultimately renders evaluation of ABA subjective, we shall see that the most appropriate doxastic attitude to adopt, with respect to the conclusions drawn from these arguments, is often suspension of judgment. A critical examination of Copi’s criteria for evaluating ABA shows that while these criteria work well for simple arguments, they fail when considering more philosophically profound ABA. This paper supports these claims by using Cleanthes’ teleological argument for the existence of God from Hume’s Dialogues Concerning …
Arguments As Abstract Objects, Paul Simard Smith, Andrei Moldovan, G C. Goddu
Arguments As Abstract Objects, Paul Simard Smith, Andrei Moldovan, G C. Goddu
OSSA Conference Archive
In recent discussions concerning the definition of argument, it has been maintained that the word ‘argument’ exhibits the process-product ambiguity, or (as in Goddu forthcoming) an act/object ambi-guity. Drawing on literature on lexical ambiguity we argue that ‘argument’ is not ambiguous. The term ‘argument’ refers to an object, not to a speech act. We also examine some of the important implications of our argument by considering the question: what sort of abstract objects are arguments?