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

Philosophy Commons

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

Articles 1 - 30 of 183

Full-Text Articles in Philosophy

Deep Disagreement In A Multicultural World, Chris Campolo Jun 2009

Deep Disagreement In A Multicultural World, Chris Campolo

OSSA Conference Archive

Deep disagreement isn’t about the irresolvability of actual disputes, it is about one of the inherent limitations of argument as a tool for re-establishing intersubjectivity. I explore the relationship between argument, deep disagreement, and shared understanding, while responding to Phillips’ criticisms of my account. If we can learn about the conditions under which argument cannot work, then we can learn when to turn to other strategies to help us get along.


Legal Arguments About Plausible Facts And Their Strategic Presentation, Henrike Jansen Jun 2009

Legal Arguments About Plausible Facts And Their Strategic Presentation, Henrike Jansen

OSSA Conference Archive

Arguments from plausibility, in which an appeal is made to customary behavior, are often used in the legal practice. For example: Joran van derSloot must have murdered Natalee Holloway, otherwise he would have called an ambulance when she looked dead. As in the example, such arguments are often presented with an explicit appeal to an inference license that gives the argument amodus tollensstructure [if he had not murdered her...]. I will address the question what motivates such a presentation.


Commentary On Van Laar, George Boger Jun 2009

Commentary On Van Laar, George Boger

OSSA Conference Archive

No abstract provided.


Reading Group Discourse: A Corpus-Based Analysis Of Argumentation And Collaboration, Kieran O'Halloran Jun 2009

Reading Group Discourse: A Corpus-Based Analysis Of Argumentation And Collaboration, Kieran O'Halloran

OSSA Conference Archive

This presentation will make a contribution to understanding the nature of debate in reading groups (i.e., people who meet to discuss books, usually novels). I will report on the findings of The Discourse of Reading Groups, a UK Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC) one-year, funded project (2008) that aims both to gather evidence about contemporary reading practices and, in part, to contribute to a sensitive understanding of social literary argumentation as a contemporary micro-culture.


Revisiting The Logical/Dialectical/Rhetorical Triumvirate, Ralph H. Johnson Jun 2009

Revisiting The Logical/Dialectical/Rhetorical Triumvirate, Ralph H. Johnson

OSSA Conference Archive

Many argumentation theorists have adopted the view that argumentation may be approached from three different perspectives: the logical, the dialectical and the rhetorical—which I refer to as the Triumvirate.). According to Wenzel (1990), the conceptual foundation for this Triumvirate is the distinction between argumentation as product, as process and as procedure (the Tripartite Distinction.). In this paper, I want to raise questions about the Triumvirate View and the Tripartite Distinction on which it is based.


Reason, Trust, And Relationships: Argument And The Disposition To Co-Operate, Moira Kloster Jun 2009

Reason, Trust, And Relationships: Argument And The Disposition To Co-Operate, Moira Kloster

OSSA Conference Archive

If we want reasoning to bridge cultural differences, argumentation theory has to show when and why to invoke a “disposition to co-operate.” But it is crucial to re-interpret co-operation as a function of relationships and processes, not as a disposition of individuals. Co-operative relationships and processes can then provide the vital path from individual scepticism to the mutual trust needed to work through difficult disputes.


Commentary On Al-Tamimi, Phyllis Rooney Jun 2009

Commentary On Al-Tamimi, Phyllis Rooney

OSSA Conference Archive

No abstract provided.


Commentary On Andone, Christopher W. Tindale Jun 2009

Commentary On Andone, Christopher W. Tindale

OSSA Conference Archive

No abstract provided.


Commentary On Bailin & Battersby, Ralph H. Johnson Jun 2009

Commentary On Bailin & Battersby, Ralph H. Johnson

OSSA Conference Archive

No abstract provided.


Rhetoric, Dialectic And Derailment In Church-State Arguments, Todd Battistelli Jun 2009

Rhetoric, Dialectic And Derailment In Church-State Arguments, Todd Battistelli

OSSA Conference Archive

This paper will examine chronically derailed church-state separation arguments in order to explore the extent to which rhetorical and dialectical approaches can be reconciled. I will consider broader conceptions of rhetoric than those employed to date in studies of strategic manoeuvring. While rhetorical appeals, such as claims of persecution, can terminally polarize church-state arguments, they may also serve as means for recovering from dialectical derailment.


Indirection In Montaigne’S “Des Cannibales” And Emerson’S “Montaigne; Or The Skeptic”, Claudia Carlos Jun 2009

Indirection In Montaigne’S “Des Cannibales” And Emerson’S “Montaigne; Or The Skeptic”, Claudia Carlos

OSSA Conference Archive

The art of “safely” criticizing the powerful through indirect argument was a well-established concept among ancient rhetoricians. It is not difficult to see the usefulness of such indirection in cultures where free speech is limited. What use, however, do these arguments have in a democracy? In exploring an answer to this question, I consider Montaigne’s “Des Cannibales” (1595) and Emerson’s “Montaigne, or, the Skeptic” (1850).


Commentary On Champagne, Gilbert Plumer Jun 2009

Commentary On Champagne, Gilbert Plumer

OSSA Conference Archive

No abstract provided.


Strategic Manoeuvring With Linguistic Arguments In The Justification Of Legal Decisions, Eveline Feteris Jun 2009

Strategic Manoeuvring With Linguistic Arguments In The Justification Of Legal Decisions, Eveline Feteris

OSSA Conference Archive

Participants to a legal process often use linguistic arguments to support their claim. With a linguistic argument it is shown that the proposed interpretation of a rule is based on the meaning of the words used in the rule in ordinary or technical language. The reason why a linguistic argument is chosen as a support for a legal claim is that linguistic arguments are considered to have a preferred status in justifying a legal decision. However, this preferred status can also be ‘misused’ for rhetorical reasons. In my contribution I analyse and evaluate an example of a form of strategic ...


Commentary On Fields, Jean Goodwin Jun 2009

Commentary On Fields, Jean Goodwin

OSSA Conference Archive

No abstract provided.


The Epistemic Utility Of Toulmin’S Argument Fields*, David M. Godden Jun 2009

The Epistemic Utility Of Toulmin’S Argument Fields*, David M. Godden

OSSA Conference Archive

Toulmin’s DWC model recognizes a plurality of argument cultures through the thesis of field dependency: that the normative features of arguments vary from one field to the next. Yet, little consensus exists concerning the nature and foundations of argument fields. This paper explores the question of whether Toulminian fields have any useful role to play in the epistemic evaluation of arguments.


Commentary On Godden, Mark Weinstein Jun 2009

Commentary On Godden, Mark Weinstein

OSSA Conference Archive

No abstract provided.


Commentary On Goodwin, Lilian Bermejo-Luque Jun 2009

Commentary On Goodwin, Lilian Bermejo-Luque

OSSA Conference Archive

No abstract provided.


Commentary On Hitchcock, Scott Jacobs Jun 2009

Commentary On Hitchcock, Scott Jacobs

OSSA Conference Archive

No abstract provided.


Commentary On Johnson, Raymie E. Mckerrow Jun 2009

Commentary On Johnson, Raymie E. Mckerrow

OSSA Conference Archive

No abstract provided.


Commentary On Kvernbekk, Mark Battersby Jun 2009

Commentary On Kvernbekk, Mark Battersby

OSSA Conference Archive

No abstract provided.


Commentary On Lewinski, Gilbert Plumer Jun 2009

Commentary On Lewinski, Gilbert Plumer

OSSA Conference Archive

No abstract provided.


Commentary On Van Den Hoven, Scott Jacobs Jun 2009

Commentary On Van Den Hoven, Scott Jacobs

OSSA Conference Archive

No abstract provided.


Commentary On Konishi, J Anthony Blair Jun 2009

Commentary On Konishi, J Anthony Blair

OSSA Conference Archive

No abstract provided.


Fallacy Forward: Situating Fallacy Theory, Catherine E. Hundleby Jun 2009

Fallacy Forward: Situating Fallacy Theory, Catherine E. Hundleby

OSSA Conference Archive

I will situate the fallacies approach to reasoning with the aim of making it more relevant to contemporary life and thus intellectually significant and valuable as a method for teaching reasoning. This entails a revision that will relegate some of the traditional fallacies to the realm of history and introduce more recently recognized problems in reasoning. Some newly recognized problems that demand attention are revealed by contemporary science studies, which reveal at least two tenacious problems in reasoning that I will explore in this paper. One of these problems is androcentrism, a ubiquitous problem with reasoning that feminists exposed in ...


Ad Hominem As A Derailment Of Confrontational Strategic Manoeuvring, Dima Mohammed Jun 2009

Ad Hominem As A Derailment Of Confrontational Strategic Manoeuvring, Dima Mohammed

OSSA Conference Archive

In order for confrontational strategic manoeuvring, aimed at defining in a reasonable way the difference of opinion to one’s own advantage, to be sound, arguers’ attempt to arrive at a particular (favourable) definition must not prevent other (non-favourable) definitions from coming about. This paper discusses the ad hominem fallacy as an obstruction of the procedure of critical testing as a result of failure to meet this particular soundness conditions.


Pragmatic Considerations In The Interpretation Of Denying The Antecedent, Andrei Moldovan Jun 2009

Pragmatic Considerations In The Interpretation Of Denying The Antecedent, Andrei Moldovan

OSSA Conference Archive

In this paper I am concerned with the analysis of fragments of a discourse or text that express deductive arguments suspected of being denials of the antecedent. I will first argue that one needs to distinguish between two senses of ‘the argument expressed.’ Second, I will show that, with respect to one of these senses, given a Gricean account of the pragmatics of conditionals, some such fragments systematically express arguments that are valid.


Commentary On Hoppmann, William Rheg Jun 2009

Commentary On Hoppmann, William Rheg

OSSA Conference Archive

No abstract provided.


Commentary On Innocenti, Chris Campolo Jun 2009

Commentary On Innocenti, Chris Campolo

OSSA Conference Archive

No abstract provided.


Commentary On Moldovan, Jim Gough Jun 2009

Commentary On Moldovan, Jim Gough

OSSA Conference Archive

No abstract provided.


Commentary On Hundleby, Daniel N. Boone Jun 2009

Commentary On Hundleby, Daniel N. Boone

OSSA Conference Archive

No abstract provided.