Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Philosophy
Recovery And Reconstruction Of Principles Of Academic Debate As Dialectical Model: An Outline Of A Procedural Model Of Argumentative Rationality, Curtis Scott Jacobs
Recovery And Reconstruction Of Principles Of Academic Debate As Dialectical Model: An Outline Of A Procedural Model Of Argumentative Rationality, Curtis Scott Jacobs
OSSA Conference Archive
Academic debate theory has developed over 125 years. According to debate theory, reasonable argumentation satisfies six obligations: (1) self-administration; (2) making prima facie/presumptively adequate moves; (3) clash; (4) meeting the burden of proof; (5) rejoinder/rebuttal; and (6) extension. These obligations define a kind of procedural rationality of argumentation distinct from the kinds of rationality elaborated by logical and rhetorical theories. Those obligations are grounded in the pragmatics of conversation and visible in debate practice.
Commentary On Petar Bodlović: "Presumptions, Burdens Of Proof, And Explanations", David Godden
Commentary On Petar Bodlović: "Presumptions, Burdens Of Proof, And Explanations", David Godden
OSSA Conference Archive
No abstract provided.
Presumptions, Burdens Of Proof, And Explanations, Petar Bodlović
Presumptions, Burdens Of Proof, And Explanations, Petar Bodlović
OSSA Conference Archive
On the standard view, there are different types of presumptions but, nevertheless, they all asymmetrically allocate the burden of proof. In this paper, I distinguish two meanings of the “burden of proof” and argue that two types of presumptions, practical and cognitive ones, allocate the burden of proof in different senses. Consequently, the standard accounts of presumptions are either more fragmented than scholars usually admit, or they have lower explanatory potential.