Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Philosophy (47)
- Social and Behavioral Sciences (17)
- Rhetoric and Composition (16)
- Communication (13)
- Logic and Foundations of Mathematics (9)
-
- English Language and Literature (7)
- Education (5)
- Rhetoric (5)
- Speech and Rhetorical Studies (4)
- Digital Humanities (3)
- Linguistics (3)
- Religion (3)
- Anthropological Linguistics and Sociolinguistics (2)
- Anthropology (2)
- Critical and Cultural Studies (2)
- Discourse and Text Linguistics (2)
- Geography (2)
- Human Geography (2)
- Law (2)
- Linguistic Anthropology (2)
- Social Influence and Political Communication (2)
- American Studies (1)
- Arabic Language and Literature (1)
- Artificial Intelligence and Robotics (1)
- Biblical Studies (1)
- Bioethics and Medical Ethics (1)
- Christianity (1)
- Communication Technology and New Media (1)
- Computer Sciences (1)
- Institution
-
- University of Windsor (32)
- University of Richmond (11)
- SUNY College Cortland (5)
- Selected Works (3)
- Swarthmore College (3)
-
- Association of Arab Universities (2)
- University of Wollongong (2)
- Utah State University (2)
- Brigham Young University (1)
- California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo (1)
- City University of New York (CUNY) (1)
- Clemson University (1)
- College of the Holy Cross (1)
- Georgia Southern University (1)
- Iowa State University (1)
- Ministry of Higher and Secondary Specialized Education of the Republic of Uzbekistan (1)
- Old Dominion University (1)
- Portland State University (1)
- Roger Williams University (1)
- Stony Brook University (1)
- University of Dayton (1)
- University of Miami (1)
- University of Nebraska - Lincoln (1)
- University of South Florida (1)
- University of Tennessee, Knoxville (1)
- Publication Year
- Publication
-
- OSSA Conference Archive (32)
- Philosophy Faculty Publications (9)
- Argument (5)
- Teaching & Learning Commons Digital Resources (3)
- Barbara Johnstone (2)
-
- Rhetoric and Communication Studies Faculty Publications (2)
- Tutor's Column (2)
- All Theses (1)
- BYU Studies Quarterly (1)
- Barry D. Fike (1)
- Department of English: Dissertations, Theses, and Student Research (1)
- English Theses & Dissertations (1)
- Faculty of Arts - Papers (Archive) (1)
- Faculty of Law, Humanities and the Arts - Papers (Archive) (1)
- Harlot: A Revealing Look at the Arts of Persuasion (1)
- Honors College Theses (1)
- Jean Goodwin (1)
- Jordan Journal of Islamic Studies (1)
- Journal of the Arab American University مجلة الجامعة العربية الامريكية للبحوث (1)
- Law Library Newsletters/Blog (1)
- Line by Line: A Journal of Beginning Student Writing (1)
- Masters Theses (1)
- Open Educational Resources (1)
- Philology Matters (1)
- Philosophy (1)
- Philosophy Articles and Papers (1)
- School of Communication and Journalism Faculty Publications (1)
- Summer Research Program (1)
- USF Tampa Graduate Theses and Dissertations (1)
Articles 61 - 77 of 77
Full-Text Articles in Arts and Humanities
Monologue, Dilogue Or Polylogue: Which Model For Public Deliberation?, Marcin Lewinski, J Anthony Blair
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 …
The Dialectical Tier Of Mathematical Proof, Andrew Aberdein, Anton Colijn
The Dialectical Tier Of Mathematical Proof, Andrew Aberdein, Anton Colijn
OSSA Conference Archive
Ralph Johnson argues that mathematical proofs lack a dialectical tier, and thereby do not qualify as arguments. This paper argues that, despite this disavowal, Johnson's account provides a compel-ling model of mathematical proof. The illative core of mathematical arguments is held to strict standards of rigour. However, compliance with these standards is itself a matter of argument, and susceptible to chal-lenge. Hence much actual mathematical practice takes place in the dialectical tier.
A Name On The Tree, Laura J. Davies
A Name On The Tree, Laura J. Davies
Harlot: A Revealing Look at the Arts of Persuasion
What's in a name? For some, family history, arguments, and identity.
Is ‘Argument’ Subject To The Product/Process Ambiguity?, G. C. Goddu
Is ‘Argument’ Subject To The Product/Process Ambiguity?, G. C. Goddu
Philosophy Faculty Publications
The product/process distinction with regards to “argument” has a longstanding history and foundational role in argumentation theory. I shall argue that, regardless of one’s chosen ontology of arguments, arguments are not the product of some process of arguing. Hence, appeal to the distinction is distorting the very organizational foundations of argumentation theory and should be abandoned
Visual Argument Reconsidered: 'Objective' Theory And A Classical Rhetorical Approach, Daniel Richards
Visual Argument Reconsidered: 'Objective' Theory And A Classical Rhetorical Approach, Daniel Richards
All Theses
Visual argument is a relatively new discipline within the field of visual rhetorics. Consequently, visual rhetoricians have presented new theories of visual argumentation without fully considering the possibilities of existing textual methodologies as explanatory tools—especially classical rhetorical devices. This thesis presents a methodology for examining and creating visual arguments based on the concepts of topoi and figures of speech. I contend that these classical rhetorical devises embody an “objective” understanding of visual communication that shows one way of bridging the empiricism/rationalism debate in epistemology. By demonstrating that knowledge comes from the necessary interplay of perception and conception, I attempt to …
What Is A “Real” Argument?, G. C. Goddu
What Is A “Real” Argument?, G. C. Goddu
Philosophy Faculty Publications
Numerous informal logicians and argumentation theorists restrict their theorizing to what they call “real” arguments. But is there a clear distinction to be made between “real” and “non-real” arguments? Here I explore four possible accounts of the alleged distinction and argue that none can serve the theoretical uses to which the distinction is most often put.
A Theory Of Argument (Book Review), G. C. Goddu
A Theory Of Argument (Book Review), G. C. Goddu
Philosophy Faculty Publications
A Theory of Argument is an advanced textbook “written for upper-level undergraduate students who have completed at least one prior course in argumentation theory, critical thinking, informal logic, formal logic, or some other related discipline” (ix). This puts Vorobej’s book in a unique position since, to my knowledge, there are no other second course undergraduate textbooks with a nonsymbolic focus. (Second course symbolic logic textbooks written for undergraduates, rather than primarily for graduate students, were relatively rare until recently; the past decade has seen a proliferation in such texts.)
Against The Informed Consent Argument For Surgeon Report Cards, David A. Neil
Against The Informed Consent Argument For Surgeon Report Cards, David A. Neil
Faculty of Arts - Papers (Archive)
The publication of outcomes information, or ‘report cards’, for individual surgeons can be argued for on three distinct grounds. One kind of argument appeals to healthcare quality, and focuses on the value of individual performance auditing for patient safety and for an evidence-based approach to best practice. A second kind of argument constructs the patient as a healthcare ‘consumer’ and appeals to a notion of consumer rights, such that patients have a right to comparative information about the healthcare products and services that they consume. Some proponents of this kind of argument believe that enabling patients to bemore informed consumers …
Walton On Argument Structure, G. C. Goddu
Walton On Argument Structure, G. C. Goddu
Philosophy Faculty Publications
In previous work I argued against (i) the likelihood of finding a theoretically sound foundation for the linked/convergent distinction and (ii) the utility of the distinction even if a sound theoretical basis could be found. Here I subject Douglas Walton’s comprehensive discussion of the linked/convergent distinction found in Argument Structure: A Pragmatic Theory to careful scrutiny and argue that at best Walton’s theory remains incomplete and that attempts to fill out the details will run afoul of at least one of the problems adduced above—i.e., result in either a theoretically unsound distinction or a theoretically sound, but unnecessary distinction.
Linking Identity And Dialect Through Stancetaking, Barbara Johnstone
Linking Identity And Dialect Through Stancetaking, Barbara Johnstone
Barbara Johnstone
No abstract provided.
The Enthymeme’S Role In Modern Discourse, Ryan Meehan
The Enthymeme’S Role In Modern Discourse, Ryan Meehan
USF Tampa Graduate Theses and Dissertations
In this paper, I wish to demonstrate how enthymemic argument pervades modern discourse. First, I will define the enthymeme in Aristotelian terms and compare its qualities to its sibling, the syllogism. Next, I will attempt to demonstrate how the enthymeme functions, paying close attention to its psychological effects as well as analyzing how the media helps promote enthymemic discourse. Finally, I will propose a way that composition instructors can harness the idea of the enthymeme to facilitate critical thinking in the classroom. The purpose of the paper is to provide evidence that a rebirth of this classical term is in …
In Defense Of The Objective Epistemic Approach To Argumentation, John Biro, Harvey Siegel
In Defense Of The Objective Epistemic Approach To Argumentation, John Biro, Harvey Siegel
Philosophy Articles and Papers
In this paper we defend a particular version of the epistemic approach to argumentation. We advance some general considerations in favor of the approach and then examine the ways in which different versions of it play out with respect to the theory of fallacies, which we see as central to an understanding of argumentation. Epistemic theories divide into objective and subjective versions. We argue in favor of the objective version, showing that it provides a better account than its subjectivist rival of the central fallacy of begging the question. We suggest that the strengths of the objective epistemic theory of …
Wittgenstein's Poker: The Story Of A Ten-Minute Argument Between Two Great Philosophers, Daniel D. Hutto
Wittgenstein's Poker: The Story Of A Ten-Minute Argument Between Two Great Philosophers, Daniel D. Hutto
Faculty of Law, Humanities and the Arts - Papers (Archive)
Did Wittgenstein violently threaten Karl Popper with a poker on the cold evening of 25 October 1946 at a meeting of Moral Sciences Club in Cambridge? Responding to this question is the wonderful pretext that the authors use to introduce the rich world and characters of mid-twenteith century philosophy. They grab their readers' imaginations by latching onto this concrete, legendary, event - the alleged aggressive weilding of a poker - at what many would have imagined to be an utterly civilised, if not downright dull, philosophical meeting. Through this investigation, they bring to life not only the characters in this …
Critical Thinking By Alec Fisher (Book Review), G. C. Goddu
Critical Thinking By Alec Fisher (Book Review), G. C. Goddu
Philosophy Faculty Publications
The aim of Critical Thinking is to explicitly and directly teach critical thinking skills and to facilitate the use of these skills to subjects and contexts beyond critical thinking (v, 1). Though the book is primarily intended as an introductory textbook for the teaching of critical thinking, Fisher maintains that the "material is presented in such a way that it can be worked through on a self-study basis"(vi).
The 'Most Important And Fundamental' Distinction In Logic, G. C. Goddu
The 'Most Important And Fundamental' Distinction In Logic, G. C. Goddu
Philosophy Faculty Publications
In this paper I argue that the debate over the purported distinction between deductive and inductive arguments can be bypassed because making the distinction is unnecessary for successfully evaluating arguments. I provide a foundation for doing logic that makes no appeal to the distinction and still performs all the relevant tasks required of an analysis of arguments. I also reply to objections to the view that we can dispense with the distinction. Finally, I conclude that the distinction between inductive and deductive arguments is not one of the most important and fundamental ideas in logic, but rather is unnecessary.
Reasons For Reason-Giving In A Public-Opinion Survey, Martha S. Cheng, Barbara Johnstone
Reasons For Reason-Giving In A Public-Opinion Survey, Martha S. Cheng, Barbara Johnstone
Barbara Johnstone
No abstract provided.
Wigmore's Chart, Jean Goodwin
Wigmore's Chart, Jean Goodwin
Jean Goodwin
A generation before Beardsley, legal scholar John Henry Wigmore invented a scheme for representing arguments in a tree diagram, aimed to help advocates analyze the proof of facts at trial. In this essay, I describe Wigmore's "Chart Method" and trace its origin and influence. Wigmore, I argue, contributes to contemporary theory in two ways. His rhetorical approach to diagramming provides a novel perspective on problems about the theory of reasoning, premise adequacy, and dialectical obligations. Further, he advances a novel solution to the problem of assessing argument quality by representing the strength of argument in meeting objections.