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

Philosophy Commons

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

Articles 1 - 9 of 9

Full-Text Articles in Philosophy

On The Difference Between Fallacy And Sophism, Michel Dufour May 2016

On The Difference Between Fallacy And Sophism, Michel Dufour

OSSA Conference Archive

The translation into French of the English word “fallacy” opens a discussion on the difference between fallacy and sophism in English. The two words are sometimes synonyms, but a difference is sometimes made on the ground that a sophism is deliberate and a fallacy is non-deliberate. In a second part of the paper this distinctive criterion is taken seriously to discuss the relative frequency of sophisms and of fallacies for a typical kind of fallacious argument. I claim that this aspect should be taken into account by a theory of fallacious argument.


The Polysemy Of ‘Fallacy’—Or ‘Bias’, For That Matter, Frank Zenker May 2016

The Polysemy Of ‘Fallacy’—Or ‘Bias’, For That Matter, Frank Zenker

OSSA Conference Archive

Starting with a brief overview of current usages (Sect. 2), this paper offers some constituents of a use-based analysis of ‘fallacy’, listing 16 conditions that have, for the most part implicitly, been discussed in the literature (Sect. 3). Our thesis is that at least three related conceptions of ‘fallacy’ can be identified. The 16 conditions thus serve to “carve out” a semantic core and to distinguish three core-specifications. As our discussion suggests, these specifications can be related to three normative positions in the philosophy of human reasoning: the meliorist, the apologist, and the panglossian (Sect. 4). Seeking to make these ...


Commentary On Enthymemes And Fallacy Gaps: Commentary On Paglieri, Scott F. Aikin May 2016

Commentary On Enthymemes And Fallacy Gaps: Commentary On Paglieri, Scott F. Aikin

OSSA Conference Archive

No abstract provided.


Commentary On: Frank Zenkers’S “The Polysemy Of ‘Fallacy’– Or ‘Bias’, For That Matter”, Michel Dufour May 2016

Commentary On: Frank Zenkers’S “The Polysemy Of ‘Fallacy’– Or ‘Bias’, For That Matter”, Michel Dufour

OSSA Conference Archive

No abstract provided.


The Abuses Of Argument: Understanding Fallacies On Toulmin's Layout Of Argument, Andrew Pineau May 2013

The Abuses Of Argument: Understanding Fallacies On Toulmin's Layout Of Argument, Andrew Pineau

OSSA Conference Archive

This paper provides a preliminary account of fallacies on Toulmin’s model of argument, one that improves upon previous attempts to understand fallacies on this argument scheme. To do this I examine Johnson and Blair’s (1983) taxonomy of three basic fallacies (irrelevant reason, hasty conclusion and problematic premise) on Toulmin’s layout.


The Use Of Hyperbole In The Argumentation Stage, A. Francisca Snoeck Henkemans May 2013

The Use Of Hyperbole In The Argumentation Stage, A. Francisca Snoeck Henkemans

OSSA Conference Archive

In this paper I investigate what role the stylistic device of hyperbole can play in arguers’ strategic maneuvers in the argumentation stage of a discussion. First, I give an analysis of the general effects the use of hyperbole may have in argumentative discourse. Next, I specify how hyperbole may contribute to arguers’ dialectical and rhetorical aims in the argumentation stage of a discussion.


Fallacy And Argumentational Vice, Andrew Aberdein May 2013

Fallacy And Argumentational Vice, Andrew Aberdein

OSSA Conference Archive

If good argument is virtuous, then fallacies are vicious. Yet fallacies cannot just be identified with vices, since vices are dispositional properties of agents whereas fallacies are types of argument. Rather, if the normativity of good argumentation is explicable in terms of virtues, we should expect the wrongness of fallacies to be explicable in terms of vices. This approach is defended through case studies of several fallacies, with particular emphasis on the ad hominem.


Denying The Antecedent And Conditional Perfection Again, Andrei Moldovan May 2013

Denying The Antecedent And Conditional Perfection Again, Andrei Moldovan

OSSA Conference Archive

It has been argued that a fragment of discourse that constitutes a fallacy of denying the antecedent at the level of what is literally said may not be a fallacy at the level of speaker meaning. The pragmatic phenomenon involved here is known as conditional perfection. I argue that the account of conditional perfection in van der Auwera (1997) and Horn (2000) has several problems, and I discuss several possible alternatives.


Androcentrism As A Fallacy Of Argumentation, Catherine Hundleby, Claudio Duran May 2011

Androcentrism As A Fallacy Of Argumentation, Catherine Hundleby, Claudio Duran

OSSA Conference Archive

The deep operation of androcentrism in scientific argumentation demands recognition as a form of fallacy. On Walton’s (1995) account, fallacies are serious mistakes in argumentation that employ presumptions acceptable in other circumstances. There are only isolated cases in which androcentric pre-sumptions are acceptable, and I argue that androcentrism affects an overarching theme of generalization in science rather than an isolated scheme. Androcentrism is related to other ways of treating privileged people as exemplary humans, whose negative impact on processes of argumentation can be described as the fallacy of “appeal to the standard.”