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

Arts and Humanities Commons

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

Articles 1 - 30 of 104

Full-Text Articles in Arts and Humanities

Socialism As A Life-Coherent Society, Jeff Noonan Nov 2011

Socialism As A Life-Coherent Society, Jeff Noonan

Philosophy Publications

All varieties of socialism share this trait in common: they are systematic alternatives to capitalism. But why should a systematic alternative to capitalism be necessary? Has it not proven to be the most productive economic system in history? Has it not created social conditions in which the powers of human imagination, creativity, and scientific understanding have grown to wider scope than in any previous society? Has it not enabled human beings to extend their life span and live healthier and more active lives than ever before? Has it not proven extraordinarily plastic, able to solve unforeseen problems in ways that …


Shredded Suite (Four Poems), Susan Holbrook Oct 2011

Shredded Suite (Four Poems), Susan Holbrook

Creative Writing Publications

No abstract provided.


Introduction: Life-Value And Social Justice, Jeff Noonan Aug 2011

Introduction: Life-Value And Social Justice, Jeff Noonan

Philosophy Publications

Since its publication in 1971, John Rawls’ A Theory of Justice has defined the terrain of political philosophical debate concerning the principles, scope, and material implications of social justice. Social justice for Rawls concerns the principles that govern the operation of major social institutions. Major social institutions structure the lives of citizens by regulating access to the resources and opportunities that the formulation and realization of human projects require. Rawls’ theory of social justice regards major institutions as just when they distribute what he calls “primary goods” in a manner that he regards as egalitarian. Hence, the subsequent social justice …


A Very Different Kind Of Rule: Credal Rules, Argumentation And Community, James Bradley, Peter Loptson May 2011

A Very Different Kind Of Rule: Credal Rules, Argumentation And Community, James Bradley, Peter Loptson

OSSA Conference Archive

In mainstream Anglo-American philosophy, the relation between cognition and community has been defined primarily in terms of the generalization of the mathematical function (Frege, Russell), especially as a model for the nature of rules (Wittgenstein and followers), which thus come to be under-stood as algorithms. This leads to the elimination of both the reflexive, synthesizing subject (for it is unnec-essary to the algorithmic decision-making procedure installed in the rule), and the intrinsic communal-historical nature of argumentation and belief-formation. Against this approach, I follow R.G. Collingwood’s hitherto unrecognized strategy in his Essay on Metaphysics (1940) and argue that the relation of …


Against Epistemic Circularity, Patrick Bondy, Kevin Delaplante May 2011

Against Epistemic Circularity, Patrick Bondy, Kevin Delaplante

OSSA Conference Archive

One finds a surprising number of defenses of the legitimacy of some kinds of question-begging (circular) arguments or beliefs in the literature. Without wanting to deny the importance of dialec-tical analyses of begging the question, what I do here is explore the epistemic side of the issue. In particu-lar, I want to explore the legitimacy of “epistemically circular” arguments and beliefs. My tentative conclu-sion is that epistemically circular arguments and beliefs are never legitimate.


An Inferential Community: Poincaré’S Mathematicians, Michel Dufour, John Woods May 2011

An Inferential Community: Poincaré’S Mathematicians, Michel Dufour, John Woods

OSSA Conference Archive

Inferential communities are communities using specific substantial argumentative schemes. The religious or scientific communities are examples. I discuss the status of the mathematical community as it appears through the position held by the French mathematician Henri Poincaré during his famous ar-guments with Russell, Hilbert, Peano and Cantor. The paper focuses on the status of complete induction and how logic and psychology shape the community of mathematicians and the teaching of mathematics.


Argumentation And Emotional Cognition In Advertisements, M Ripley, Maureen P. Gowing May 2011

Argumentation And Emotional Cognition In Advertisements, M Ripley, Maureen P. Gowing

OSSA Conference Archive

From Spinoza to today, it has been noted that human beings respond to what is unusual in our lives. The advertising community knows this and struggles to find ways to be unusual in the face of an estimated 3,500 ads per day. One way is through emotion. This paper examines arguments made in advertisements where emotional cognition is appealed to and how they differ from ads that appeal to rational cognition.


Conflict And Consultation: Strategic Manoeuvring In Response To An Antibiotic Request, Nanon Labrie, Douglas Walton May 2011

Conflict And Consultation: Strategic Manoeuvring In Response To An Antibiotic Request, Nanon Labrie, Douglas Walton

OSSA Conference Archive

In recent years, the model of shared decision-making has become increasingly promoted as the preferred standard in doctor-patient communication. As the model considers doctor and patient as coe-qual partners that negotiate their preferred treatment options in order to reach a shared decision, shared de-cision-making notably leaves room for the usage of argumentation in the context of medical consultation. A paradigm example of argumentative conflict in consultation is the discussion that emerges between doctors and their patients concerning antibiotics as a method of treatment for what is presumed to be a viral infec-tion. In this paper, a case of such argumentative …


Strategic Manoeuvring In Simultaneous Discussions, Dima Mohammed, Robert C. Rowland May 2011

Strategic Manoeuvring In Simultaneous Discussions, Dima Mohammed, Robert C. Rowland

OSSA Conference Archive

In public political discussions, an accusation of inconsistency can play a role in a number of discussions that run simultaneously. In this paper, I discuss the implications of considering the different simultaneous discussions to which the accusation contributes when examining it. While the different politi-cal considerations derived from these discussions can shed significant light on the strategic function of the accusation, such considerations may also lead to an inconsistent critical evaluation of it.


Arguments As Abstract Objects, Paul Simard Smith, Andrei Moldovan, G C. Goddu May 2011

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?


Critical Thinking And Informal Logic: Neuropsychological Perspectives, Paul Thagard May 2011

Critical Thinking And Informal Logic: Neuropsychological Perspectives, Paul Thagard

OSSA Conference Archive

This article challenges the common view that improvements in critical thinking are best pursued by investigations in informal logic. From the perspective of research in psychology and neuroscience, human inference is a process that is multimodal, parallel, and often emotional, which makes it unlike the linguistic, serial, and narrowly cognitive structure of arguments. Attempts to improve inferential practice need to consider psychological error tendencies, which are patterns of thinking that are natural for people but frequently lead to mistakes in judgment. This article discusses two important but neglected error tendencies: motivated inference and fear-driven inference.


A Critical Examination And Development Of Wellman’S Theory Of Conductive Argument, J Blair, Dale Hample May 2011

A Critical Examination And Development Of Wellman’S Theory Of Conductive Argument, J Blair, Dale Hample

OSSA Conference Archive

The paper aims to provide an analysis and critique of Carl Wellman’s account of conduction presented in Challenge and Response and Morals and Ethics. It considers several issues, including: reason-ing vs. argument, the definition vs. the three patterns of conduction, pro and con arguments as dialogues, their assessment, the concept of validity, applications beyond moral arguments, argument type vs. as crite-rion of evaluation.


A Gendered Analysis Of The Role Of Authority In Argumentation, Khameiel Al Tamimi, John E. Fields May 2011

A Gendered Analysis Of The Role Of Authority In Argumentation, Khameiel Al Tamimi, John E. Fields

OSSA Conference Archive

The first part of this paper will look at how essential features of power and authority affect the credibility of arguments. Empirical evidence from communication studies and feminist writings, such Sue Campbell, and Robin Lakoff, shows that there is inherent disparity in the reception of arguments when presented by men and women. The second part will aim to elucidate how this problem of lack of authority is not addressed by the ad verecundiam fallacy.


Arguing By Apostrophizing, Beth Innocenti, Manfred Kraus May 2011

Arguing By Apostrophizing, Beth Innocenti, Manfred Kraus

OSSA Conference Archive

I submit that arguers may use apostrophe (direct address to someone present or absent) to pressure reluctant auditors to adhere to norms of argumentation, and illustrate with the exemplary case of Abraham Lincoln’s 1860 speech at Cooper Union. Lincoln uses apostrophe to manifest the norm of tenta-tively considering a reasonable case and to discharge his obligation to adhere to the norm; and in doing so pressures auditors to adhere to it.


Choosing Variants Of Pragmatic Argumentation In Anticipation Of Countermoves In Health Brochures, Lotte Van Poppel, Linda Carozza May 2011

Choosing Variants Of Pragmatic Argumentation In Anticipation Of Countermoves In Health Brochures, Lotte Van Poppel, Linda Carozza

OSSA Conference Archive

In this paper, I will determine the strategic function of the use of four variants of pragmatic argumentation in the context of advisory health brochures. I argue that each variant functions as a strategic manoeuvre that deals with potential countermoves: with variant I and II writers can address anticipated doubt with respect to the standpoint and with variants III and IV they can strategically erase potential criti-cism or possible alternatives to the proposed action


Cognition And Literary Ethical Criticism, Gilbert Plumer, Louis Groarke May 2011

Cognition And Literary Ethical Criticism, Gilbert Plumer, Louis Groarke

OSSA Conference Archive

“Ethical criticism” is an approach to literary studies that holds that reading certain carefully selected novels can make us ethically better people, e.g., by stimulating our sympathetic imagination (Nussbaum). I will try to show that this nonargumentative approach cheapens the persuasive force of novels and that its inherent bias and censorship undercuts what is perhaps the principal value and defense of the novel—that reading novels can be critical to one’s learning how to think.


Convergent Causal Arguments In Conversation, Dale Hample, Katarzyna Budzynska May 2011

Convergent Causal Arguments In Conversation, Dale Hample, Katarzyna Budzynska

OSSA Conference Archive

In theory, flawed arguments are not individually sufficient to justify a conclusion, but several may converge to do so. This is an empirical study of how arguers respond to a series of imperfect causal arguments during a serious conversation. People became less critical of the flawed arguments as more of the arguments appeared. The study gives empirical evidence that ordinary arguers permit sufficiency to accumulate during an extended discussion.


Deep Disagreements: A Meta-Argumentation Approach, Maurice Finocchiaro, David M. Godden May 2011

Deep Disagreements: A Meta-Argumentation Approach, Maurice Finocchiaro, David M. Godden

OSSA Conference Archive

This paper examines the views of Fogelin, Woods, Johnstone, etc., concerning deep disa-greements, force-five standoffs, philosophical controversies, etc. My approach is to reconstruct their views and critiques of them as meta-arguments, and to elaborate the meta-argumentative aspects of radical disa-greements. It turns out that deep disagreements are resolvable to a greater degree than usually thought, but only by using special principles and practices, such as meta-argumentation, ad hominem argumentation (in Johnstone’s sense), Ramsey’s principle, etc.


Defining Functions Of Danish Political Commentary, Mette Bengtsson, Mary L. Kahl May 2011

Defining Functions Of Danish Political Commentary, Mette Bengtsson, Mary L. Kahl

OSSA Conference Archive

In Denmark political commentary is still a relatively new phenomenon. This paper analyzes the metadiscourse in relation to political commentary to identify the different understandings that have coalesced around political commentary as a genre. I argue that people in different positions (e.g. citizens, politicians, journalists, political editors, chief editors and political commentators themselves) emphasize different explanations for the rise of the genre and thereby functions of political commentary as part of an argumentative strategy favouring their own interests.


Eating Flowers, Holding Hands: Should Critical Thinking Pedagogy ‘Go Wild’?, Benjamin Hamby, Ralph H. Johnson May 2011

Eating Flowers, Holding Hands: Should Critical Thinking Pedagogy ‘Go Wild’?, Benjamin Hamby, Ralph H. Johnson

OSSA Conference Archive

This paper responds to Anthony Weston’s “What if Teaching Went Wild?” (2004), in which he proposes a radical approach to environmental education, suggesting among other things a stress on “otherness”. Comparing Weston’s proposal to Richard Paul’s (1992) concept of the “strong sense” critical thinker, and to Trudy Govier’s (2010) rationale for her pedagogy of argument, I suggest that “going wild” in standalone critical thinking courses could provide a positive, unsettling push, helping students to reconnect through the otherness of alternative argumentation.


Ernest Sosa And Virtuously Begging The Question, Michael Walschots, Scott F. Aikin May 2011

Ernest Sosa And Virtuously Begging The Question, Michael Walschots, Scott F. Aikin

OSSA Conference Archive

This paper discusses the notion of epistemic circularity, supposedly different from logical circu-larity, and evaluates Ernest Sosa’s claim that this specific kind of circular reasoning is virtuous rather than vicious. I attempt to determine whether or not the conditions said to make epistemic circularity a permissible instance of begging the question could make other instances of circular reasoning equally permissible.


Evolution, Cognition And Argumentation, Cristian Santibanez Yanez, Michael A. Gilbert May 2011

Evolution, Cognition And Argumentation, Cristian Santibanez Yanez, Michael A. Gilbert

OSSA Conference Archive

Sperber and Mercier (2009, 2010) maintain that argumentation is a meta-representational module. In their evolutionary view of argumentation, the function of this module would be to regulate the flow of information between interlocutors through persuasiveness on the side of the communicator and epistemic vigilance on the side of the audience. The aim of this paper is to discuss this definition of argumen-tation by analyzing what they mean by “communicator’s persuasiveness” and “audience epistemic vigilance”


Exploiting The Room For Strategic Maneuvering In Argumentative Discourse: Dealing With Audience Demand In The European Parliament, Frans Van Eemeren, Bart Garrsen, Robert Thomas Craig May 2011

Exploiting The Room For Strategic Maneuvering In Argumentative Discourse: Dealing With Audience Demand In The European Parliament, Frans Van Eemeren, Bart Garrsen, Robert Thomas Craig

OSSA Conference Archive

No abstract provided.


Fallacies: Do We “Use” Them Or “Commit” Them? Or: Is All Our Life Just A Collection Of Fallacies?, Igor Zagar, Dima Mohammed May 2011

Fallacies: Do We “Use” Them Or “Commit” Them? Or: Is All Our Life Just A Collection Of Fallacies?, Igor Zagar, Dima Mohammed

OSSA Conference Archive

After C. L. Hamblin's groundbreaking work Fallacies (1970), re-interpreting what used to be known as "mistakes in reasoning" or "bad arguments" since Aristotle (On Sophistical Refutations), the study of fallacies started to bloom, coming up with ever new perspectives and conceptualizations of what should count as a mistake in reasoning and argumentation, and why a certain kind of reasoning should at all be considered a mistake (Woods & Walton 1989, van Eemeren & Grootendorst 1992, etc.). This paper will be concerned with two questions. First, an epistemological one: do we (unintentionally) commit fallacies, or do we (intentionally) use them? Secondly, …


Fallacy Identification In A Dialectical Approach To Teaching Critical Thinking, Mark Battersby, Sharon Bailin, Jan Albert Van Laar May 2011

Fallacy Identification In A Dialectical Approach To Teaching Critical Thinking, Mark Battersby, Sharon Bailin, Jan Albert Van Laar

OSSA Conference Archive

The dialectical approach to teaching critical thinking is centred on a comparative evaluation of contending arguments, so that generally the strength of an argument for a position can only be assessed in the context of this dialectic. The identification of fallacies, though important, plays only a preliminary role in the evaluation to individual arguments. Our approach to fallacy identification and analysis sees fal-lacies as argument patterns whose persuasive power is disproportionate to their probative value.


High School Philosophy Teachers’ Use Of Textbooks: Critical Thinking Or Teaching To The Text?, Laura Pinto, Graham P. Mcdonough, Sharon Bailin May 2011

High School Philosophy Teachers’ Use Of Textbooks: Critical Thinking Or Teaching To The Text?, Laura Pinto, Graham P. Mcdonough, Sharon Bailin

OSSA Conference Archive

One of the few contexts in which high school students are introduced to argumentation is in philosophy courses. Do such teachers promote critical thinking and argumentation? We present the findings of a mixed-methods empirical study of Ontario high school philosophy teachers, providing insight into the degree to which teachers promote oppositional readings of texts in a manner consistent with critical thinking. We identify the factors that contribute to critical thinking, as well as the barriers, focusing textbooks use.


How Many Premises Can An Argument Have?, G C. Goddu, David Hitchcock May 2011

How Many Premises Can An Argument Have?, G C. Goddu, David Hitchcock

OSSA Conference Archive

Is it possible for an argument to have either zero premises or an infinite number of premises? I shall argue that regardless of how you conceive of arguments you should accept that an argument could have an infinite number of premises. The zero case is more complicated since the matter seems to depend not only on the metaphysics of arguments, but also the nature and function of arguing. I shall argue that at least a plausible case can be made for the possibility of zero premise arguments.


Inference As Growth: Peirce’S Ecstatic Logic Of Illation, Philip Rose, John Woods May 2011

Inference As Growth: Peirce’S Ecstatic Logic Of Illation, Philip Rose, John Woods

OSSA Conference Archive

For Peirce, logic is essentially illative, a relation of inferential growth. It follows that inference and argumentation are essentially ecstatic, an asymmetrical, ampliative movement from antecedent to consequent. It also follows that logic is inherently inductive. While deduction remains an essential and irreplaceable aspect of logic, it should be seen as a more abstract expression of the illative, semiological essence of inference as such.


Monologue, Dilogue Or Polylogue: Which Model For Public Deliberation?, Marcin Lewinski, J Anthony Blair May 2011

Monologue, Dilogue Or Polylogue: Which Model For Public Deliberation?, Marcin Lewinski, J Anthony Blair

OSSA Conference Archive

“Reasonable hostility” is a norm of communicative conduct initially developed by studying public exchanges in education governance meetings in local U.S. communities. In this paper I consider the norm’s usefulness for and applicability to a U.S. state-level public hearing about a bill to legalize civil unions. Following an explication of reasonable hostility and grounded practical theory, the approach to inquiry that guides my work, I describe Hawaii’s 2009, 18-hour public hearing and analyze selected seg-ments of it. I show that this particular public hearing raised demands for testifiers on the anti-civil union side of the argument that reasonable hostility does …


Moral Disagreements And Pernicious Pragmatism: Pluralism, Value Argumentation, And The U.S. Health Care Debate, John Rief, Matthew Paul Brigham, Bill Balthrop May 2011

Moral Disagreements And Pernicious Pragmatism: Pluralism, Value Argumentation, And The U.S. Health Care Debate, John Rief, Matthew Paul Brigham, Bill Balthrop

OSSA Conference Archive

No abstract provided.