Epistemology Commons^™

“Identity-Based” And “Diversity-Based” Evidence Between Linear And Fractal Rationality, Maurizio Manzin

OSSA Conference Archive

I identify two types of evidence: one based on “linear” rationality (LR) and the other based on “fractal” rationality (FR). For LR, evidence depends only on systematic coherence, and all other sources of knowledge (intuitive, perceptive, symbolic, poetic, moral, etc.) are marginalized. For FR, evidence requires an approach more adherent to the “irregularities” of life. LR philosophically entails a Neoplatonist and Cartesian account on identity, whereas FR entails Plato’s account on identity and diversity as coessential.

Commentary: Notes On Katharina Stevens Essay "Charity For Moral Reasons", Maureen Linker

OSSA Conference Archive

There are a variety of important and insightful points in Stevens’ essay for argument theorists and teachers of logic and critical thinking. The interplay between morality, epistemology, and metaphysics for instance that underlie reason and argumentation. The important point that arguers and their interlocuters, when representing reasons, are doing something fundamentally human and their identity as knowers should be respected as part of a reasoning community. The equally important point that epistemic imperialism is a risk of toxic charity when an arguer with more social power and privilege, presumes to interpret an interlocuter on the social margins (who may have …

Commentary On Lumer, "A Theory Of Philosophical Arguments", Patrick Bondy

OSSA Conference Archive

Commentary on Christoph Lumer, "A Theory of Philosophical Argument," for OSSA 12. Lumer offers a general theory of philosophical argument. This commentary discusses four related topics: Pascal arguments; the problem of the criterion; the status of intuitions in philosophy; and the status of arguments that do not fit into the four ideal argument types that Lumer sets out.

The Persuasive Force Of The Ad Baculum, John P. Casey

OSSA Conference Archive

Standard accounts of the ad baculum locate its fallaciousness either in irrelevance or dialogue shift. Such accounts, however, fail to explain its persuasiveness. This paper offers a new account where the real target of an ad baculum is an audience downstream from the initial ad baculum exchange. This means that the ad baculum consists in misrepresenting the quality of evidence by means of the forced adoption of a particular standpoint.

Getting Down In The Muds: A Ludological Perspective On Arguers, Michael A. Yong-Set

OSSA Conference Archive

Dan Cohen (2018) and Michael Gilbert (1997) have variously emphasized the need for argumentation theorists to pay attention to ‘arguers’ and not just ‘arguments.’ Following Yong-Set (2016), this paper will suggest that ‘games’ can be leveraged to enrich an understanding of the ‘person’ aspect of argumentation.

Ludology is the academic and critical study of games qua games, especially in terms of system design, player experience and the socio-cultural dynamics of gaming. By drawing upon and extending the lessons learned from ludologist Bartle’s (1996, 2012) analysis of the relation between player-types and games that successfully implement Multi-User-Dungeons (MUDs), I argue that …

Commentary On 'Acts Of Ostension', Paul L. Simard Smith

OSSA Conference Archive

No abstract provided.

Commentary On ‘Levels Of Depth In Deep Disagreement’, Tim Kenyon

OSSA Conference Archive

No abstract provided.

Bias In Legitimate Ad Hominem Arguments, Patrick Bondy

OSSA Conference Archive

This paper is about bias and ad hominem arguments. It will begin by rehearsing some reasons for thinking that there are both legitimate and illegitimate ad hominems, as well as reasons for thinking that biases can be both justified and unjustified. It will explain that justified biases about people with certain social identities can give rise to both legitimate and illegitimate ad hominem attacks, while unjustified biases only give rise to illegitimate ad hominems.

The paper will then describe Audrey Yap’s view that even when an unjustified bias is made explicit and shown to be unjustified, it can still make …

Ad Stuprum: The Fallacy Of Appeal To Sex, Beverley I. Anger Ms., Catherine Hundleby Dr.

OSSA Conference Archive

Arguments sometimes appeal to sex by invoking the sexuality of a model or a person or the promise of sexual gratification. When sexual gratification is not a relevant consideration, the appeal seems to be fallacious.

We will address when this may be an appropriate line of reasoning -- there is such a thing as “sex appeal”--and when it may be biased to assume the relevance of sexuality. Advertising, which provides infinite examples of appeal to sex, may be questionable as a case of argumentation, as opposed to some other sort of negotiation or communication, especially perhaps in its reliance on …

Compassion, Authority And Baby Talk: Prosody And Objectivity, Leo Groarke, Gabrijela Kišiček

OSSA Conference Archive

Recent work on multimodal argumentation has explored facets of argumentation which have no obvious analogue in the written arguments which were emphasized in traditional accounts of argument. One of these facets is prosody: the structure and quality of the sound of spoken language. Prosodic features include pitch, temporal structure, pronunciation, loudness and voice quality, rhythm, emphasis and accent. In this paper, we explore the ways that prosodic features may be invoked in arguing.

Pursuing Objectivity: How Virtuous Can You Get?, José Ángel Gascón

OSSA Conference Archive

While, in common usage, objectivity is usually regarded as a virtue, and failures to be objective as vices, this concept tends to be absent in argumentation theory. This paper will explore the possibility of taking objectivity as an argumentative virtue. Several problems immediately arise: could objectivity be understood in positive terms— not only as mere absence of bias? Is it an attainable ideal? Or perhaps objectivity could be explained as a combination of other virtues?