Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Keyword
-
- Amounts to there being a presumption in favor of the premise. We have also argued that presumption is dependent on the sources which have vouched for a statement. We have further claimed that whether a source's vouching for a statement creates a presumption for it depends in part on what type of statement is being vouched for. Suppose a proponent P vouches for both of these statements: "There is a red apple on the window sill." "Horatio placed the red apple on the window sill to show his love for Ophelia." Intuitively (1)
- And Kruger (1)
- And necessary statements as the basic types of statement. We shall also give accounts of the distinguishing features of each type. In doing this (1)
- And proposed criteria for distinguishing types of statements involve serious philosophical difficulties. Building on the work of Sproule (1)
- And that part of the explanation consists in pointing out that the first statement is a description while the second is an interpretation. But this brings us to the issue of what types of statements are there and how we distinguish them. The field of rhetoric known as stasis theory addresses these issues. However (1)
-
- Broadly speaking (1)
- But not for the first. I believe we can explain why this is the case (1)
- Different rhetoricians give different typologies of statements (1)
- Evaluations (1)
- Fahnestock and Secor (1)
- Interpretations (1)
- There is an air of controversiality or at least questionability about the second statement which does not apply to the first. We are inclined to ask for evidence for the second statement (1)
- We have argued that premise acceptability (1)
- We shall be giving a philosophical explication of these distinctions from stasis theory. We shall conclude by showing how this account of the various types of statements fits into an overall account of premise acceptability. (1)
- We shall distinguish descriptions (1)
- We shall present a specific typology of statements. In particular (1)
Articles 1 - 30 of 115
Full-Text Articles in Philosophy
Commentary On Hayes, A Francisca Snoeck Henkemans
Commentary On Hayes, A Francisca Snoeck Henkemans
OSSA Conference Archive
No abstract provided.
Commentary On Hicks, Eveline Feteris
Differences Between Argumentative And Rhetorical Space, Ralph Johnson
Differences Between Argumentative And Rhetorical Space, Ralph Johnson
OSSA Conference Archive
The issue I address in this paper is the age-old problem of the relationship between logic and rhetoric. More specifically, I ask the question, how do logic and rhetoric differ in their approaches to the study of argumentation? What makes this question timely are the changes that logic has undergone in the last 25 years. In this paper, I develop the idea that an argument is the central event in what I call argumentative space. I present a conception of argumentative space as a subspace within rational space and seek to provide a rough characterization of the main features of …
Commentary On Russell, Richard Feldman
Rhetoric And Reason In The Civil Science Of Thomas Hobbes, William Mathie
Rhetoric And Reason In The Civil Science Of Thomas Hobbes, William Mathie
OSSA Conference Archive
In successive versions of Hobbes's political teaching we see a changing account of the nature of rhetoric, or eloquence, and of the dangers it poses for political life. In his Leviathan Hobbes expresses a new confidence that the causes of political dissolution can in principle be entirely eradicated. I argue that Hobbes's new hope is based on his account of the problem of rhetoric and of the solution to that problem developed in Leviathan. I also examine two recent and important accounts of Hobbes's understanding of rhetoric by Quentin Skinner and David Johnston.
Persuasion Monologue, Chris Reed, Derek Long
Persuasion Monologue, Chris Reed, Derek Long
OSSA Conference Archive
The emphasis in most process-oriented models of argumentation is placed heavily upon analysis of dialogue. The current work puts forward an account which examines the argumentation involved in persuasive monologue, drawing upon commitment-based theories of dialogue. The various differences between monologue and dialogue are discussed, with particular reference to the possibility of designing a monologue game in which commitments are dynamically incurred and updated as the monologue is created. Finally, the computational advantages of adopting such an approach are explored in the context of an existing architecture for the generation of natural language arguments.
Commentary On Aberdein, Bruce Russell
Commentary On Adler, Dale Jacquette
Commentary On Bailenson & Rips, Stuart M. Keeley
Commentary On Bailenson & Rips, Stuart M. Keeley
OSSA Conference Archive
No abstract provided.
The Limits Of The Dialogue Model Of Argument, J Anthony Blair
The Limits Of The Dialogue Model Of Argument, J Anthony Blair
OSSA Conference Archive
The paper starts from scepticism that all argumentation is dialogical or that all dialogue types are argumentation. The hypothesis is that the concepts of dialectic and dialogue are not isomorphic, at least as applied to argumentation. The paper will cover: (a) a review of the conceptions of dialectic and of dialogue in the argumentation literature, (b) an analysis of these concepts, (c) a critical assessment of the limits of the discussion of dialogue as a model for argumentation (d) a discussion of alternative models of argumentation, (e) an exploration of the implications of the proposed models for the relation between …
Commentary On Boger, David Hitchcock
The Soundness Of Pragmatic Argumentation: Does The End Justify The Means?, Feteris T. Eveline
The Soundness Of Pragmatic Argumentation: Does The End Justify The Means?, Feteris T. Eveline
OSSA Conference Archive
This paper addresses a specific form of argumentation, pragmatic argumentation, in which a certain action, choice or decision is justified by referring to the favourable consequences of the action (and the unfavourable consequences of the alternative action). The paper starts with a survey of the ideas on legal argumentation developed in argumentation theory, analytical philosophy and legal theory. The various ideas are brought together in a pragma-dialectical perspective in order to give a systematic survey of the various conceptions of pragmatic argumentation and to decide which further lines of research must be developed.
Commentary On Freeman, Marie Secor
Forms Of Authority And The Real Argumentum Ad Verecundiam, Jean Goodwin
Forms Of Authority And The Real Argumentum Ad Verecundiam, Jean Goodwin
OSSA Conference Archive
We ordinarily distinguish between the authority exercised by an expert and that exercised by a commander. Nevertheless, prior argumentation theorists have been unable to articulate fully the grounds on which we make this distinction. In this paper, I propose a principle for distinguishing types of authorities. I argue further that on this principle, Locke's argumentum ad verecundiam represents a third type, reducible neither to command nor expertise. Finally, I point to significant instances of this third appeal to authority, especially in Roman legal and political discourse.
Infinite Regress Of Recurring Questions And Answers, Claude Gratton
Infinite Regress Of Recurring Questions And Answers, Claude Gratton
OSSA Conference Archive
I examine a number of infinite regress arguments whose infinite regresses are presented or described in terms of recurring questions and answers in order to determine whether such recurring questions have any role in generating these infinite regresses, or in disqualifying the recurring answers. I argue that despite the existence of such infinite regress arguments and the suggestions of some philosophers, these recurring questions have no such roles. Some ways of handling these infinite regress arguments are then proposed.
Commentary On Gratton, Joseph A. Novak
The Topics In Classical And Modern Theories Of Interpretation, Albert W. Halsall
The Topics In Classical And Modern Theories Of Interpretation, Albert W. Halsall
OSSA Conference Archive
The purpose is to discuss some of the results and problems presented by the study of the topics between Aristotle's work and the treatment of them by Perelman and his followers. For instance, the method whereby classical and modern rhetorical theorists connect figurative language with techniques of persuasion, consists in proposing that there exists a restricted number of "universal" argumentative strategies. Until the Renaissance, text producers and receivers shared a common knowledge of such argumentative procedures. In the twentieth century, Perelman and others have re-conceived the topics making up the "New Rhetoric's" argumentative function, as comparison of the two systems …
Commentary On Kauffeld, James B. Freeman
Commentary On Kauffeld, James B. Freeman
OSSA Conference Archive
No abstract provided.
The Reconstruction Of Legal Analogy-Argumentation: Monological And Dialogical Approaches, Harrm Kloosterhuis
The Reconstruction Of Legal Analogy-Argumentation: Monological And Dialogical Approaches, Harrm Kloosterhuis
OSSA Conference Archive
In this contribution two approaches of legal analogy-argumentation will be discussed: the traditional, monological approach and the dialogical approach. This contribution aims at answering the question in how far these approaches may serve as adequate instruments for rational reconstructions of this analogy-argumentation. We will also indicate along which lines the insights resulting from these approaches may be developed further in order to arrive at a more comprehensive and systematic method for a rational reconstruction of argumentation of this sort. We will make use of the insights gained from the pragma-dialectical argumentation theory.
Do The Fallacies You Favour Retard The Growth Of Knowledge?, Connie Missimer
Do The Fallacies You Favour Retard The Growth Of Knowledge?, Connie Missimer
OSSA Conference Archive
A simple way to approach fallacies is to ask, "Has reasoning-strategy X retarded or halted the growth of knowledge?" and seek uncontroversial historical events as empirical support for the fallacy moniker. Historical support also offers a means of retiring reasoning strategies heretofore thought fallacious—they are wrongly accused if they helped drive knowledge. Finally, this approach allows us to be more critical of our argumentative practices. Evidence is offered for an Intuitive Fallacy: In its extreme form it rules out the possibility of (contradicting) evidence; in its weaker form, it is a non-response to evidence that appears to be a response.
Commentary On Reed & Long, Mark Vorobej
Argument And Authority: On The Pragmatic Basis Of Accepting An Appeal To Authority, Marco Ruhl
Argument And Authority: On The Pragmatic Basis Of Accepting An Appeal To Authority, Marco Ruhl
OSSA Conference Archive
According to an everyday concept of 'argumentation' the presence of authority rules out the possibility for argumentation. However, in the case of appeal to authority, e.g., argumentation and authority coexist. The analysis of (idealized) teacher-and-student interactions shows that a teacher's utterances are critically evaluated by the students, although these may lack relevant knowledge for adequate evaluation. The teacher cannot rely upon his authority alone; if the students accept what she says, the acceptance can be said to be the positive result of a critical evaluation based on the students' knowledge about the subject. Therefore, a dialogical concept of argument acceptability, …
Commentary On Souder, Daniel H. Cohen
On ‘Burdens’ Of Proof In Ordinary Language Argumentation, Christopher Thomson
On ‘Burdens’ Of Proof In Ordinary Language Argumentation, Christopher Thomson
OSSA Conference Archive
Various textbooks in logic and rhetoric seem content to treat the notion of the burden of proof as if it were a simple obligation associated with the act of proffering statements for another's consideration. Nevertheless, we can uncover cases in argumentation where both sides champion statements but only one side bears a burden of proof. I believe that an explanation for this difference in emphasis will involve distinguishing between two different (but not unrelated) burdens of proof that can come to bear in the course of an argument.
Fallacies On Film, Mark Vorobej
Fallacies On Film, Mark Vorobej
OSSA Conference Archive
This paper explores the question of how films may be used to enhance the teaching of fallacies. Theoretical questions about the nature of fallacies will be addressed along with pedagogical issues. The paper is structured around a case study—an examination of various arguments from ignorance as articulated by fictional characters in the 1964 Hammer horror production of The Gorgon
The Normative Impotence Of Ideal Models, John Woods
The Normative Impotence Of Ideal Models, John Woods
OSSA Conference Archive
In the methodology of theory construction, the concept of "intuitions" is commonly assigned a central role. This is especially true of philosophical and social scientific theories or rational human agency. An equally important trait of such accounts is the theorist's employment of "ideal models" or rational agency. It is frequently supposed that the concept of intuitions and the concept of ideal models link in such a way as to give rise to a coherent and load-bearing notion of "objective normativity." This paper shows, with reference to a wide range of contemporary theories, (a) that the employment of ideal models is …
Rhetoric And The Unconscious, Michael Billig
Rhetoric And The Unconscious, Michael Billig
OSSA Conference Archive
This paper develops the ideas of rhetorical psychology by applying them to some basic Freudian concepts. In so doing, the paper considers whether there might be a 'Dialogic Unconscious'. So far rhetorical psychology has tended to concentrate upon conscious thought rather than on the unconscious. It has suggested that thinking is modelled on argument and dialogue, and that rhetoric provides the means of opening up matters for thought and discussion. However, rhetoric may also provide the means for closing down topics and, thereby, provide the means of repression. It will be suggested that language is not merely expressive but it …
Introduction: The Importance Of Rhetoric For Argumentation, Christopher W. Tindale
Introduction: The Importance Of Rhetoric For Argumentation, Christopher W. Tindale
OSSA Conference Archive
No abstract provided.
Presumptions And The Distribution Of Argumentative Burdens In Acts Of Proposing And Accusing, Fred Kauffeld
Presumptions And The Distribution Of Argumentative Burdens In Acts Of Proposing And Accusing, Fred Kauffeld
OSSA Conference Archive
This paper joins the voices warning against hasty transference of legal concepts of presumption to other kinds of argumentation, especially to deliberation about future acts and policies. Comparison of the pragmatics which respectively constitute the illocutionary acts of ACCUSING and PROPOSING reveals striking differences in the ways presumptions prompt accusers and proposers to undertake probative responsibilities and, also, points to corresponding differences in their probative duties. This comparison highlights significant contrasts between the way presumptions figure in legal reasoning as opposed to deliberation; the comparison also raises theoretically important questions about the norms governing persuasive argumentation. This paper is based …