Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 8

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  fallacies
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Fallacies and their Classification according to the Early Hindu Logicians

100%
Stasiak S.
Rocznik Orientalistyczny
|
|
vol. Rocznik Orientalistyczny, T. 06, (1928), wyd. 1929
2
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

In Defence of a Fallacy

80%
Davies R.
Studia Semiotyczne
|
2020
|
vol. 34
|
issue 2
EN
In light of recent developments in argumentation theory, we begin by considering the account that Aristotle gives of what he calls sophistical refutations (elenchoi sophistikoi) and of the usefulness of being able to recognise various species of them. His diagnosis of one of his examples of the grouping that he labels epomenon is then compared with a very recent account of the matter, which, like Aristotle, calls on us to attribute a mistake or confusion to anyone who uses this kind of argument. From examination of three other examples that Aristotle himself supplies of epomenon, it appears that there are cases of inferences of this kind that we need not, and perhaps cannot, avoid making. The suggestion is made that this is because the whole family of what Peirce calls abductions have important characteristics in common with epomenon.
3
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Ad hominem and false analogy abuses in a Romanian intellectual debate

70%
Pănoiu V.-M.
ARGUMENT: Biannual Philosophical Journal
|
2022
|
vol. 12
|
issue 1
59-74
EN
A pragma-dialectical inside view of a Romanian intellectual debate is meant to unveil strategic maneuvering and fallacies, in a public sphere said to be dominated by “status groups”, “backstage maneuvers” and “conspiracy”. A book written by a Romanian author sparked off an area of disagreement leading to ad hominem attacks and false analogies ranging from postcommunist issues to political correctness.
4

Without Qualification: An Inquiry Into the Secundum Quid

70%
Botting D.
Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric
|
2014
|
vol. 36
|
issue 1
161-170
EN
In this paper I will consider several interpretations of the fallacy of secundum quid as it is given by Aristotle in the Sophistical Refutations and argue that they do not work, one reason for which is that they all imply that the fallacy depends on language and thus fail to explain why Aristotle lists this fallacy among the fallacies not depending on language (extra dictione), amounting often to a claim that Aristotle miscategorises this fallacy. I will argue for a reading that preserves Aristotle’s categorization by a quite different account of how qualifications function.
5

Strategic Manoeuvring and the Selection of Starting Points in the Pragma-Dialectical Framework

70%
Forgács G.
Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric
|
2014
|
vol. 36
|
issue 1
241-249
EN
The article analyzes strategic manoeuvring within the pragmadialectical framework with respect to the selection of starting points in the opening stage to frame the arguments. The Terri Schiavo case is presented, which can provide interesting insights concerning this issue. I would like to show that resolution of the difference of opinion requires the resolution of a subordinate difference of opinion concerning how to label her medical state, and why discussants were not able to resolve this subordinate difference of opinion. After, the conflict that arises between critical reasonableness and rhetorical effectiveness is examined and how strategic manoeuvring aims to resolve this conflict. In the final part of the paper I argue that the problems raised can be dealt with within the framework of pragma-dialectics.
6
Content available remote

A Critical Discussion Game for Prohibiting Fallacies

61%
Visser J., Budzynska K., Reed C.
Logic and Logical Philosophy
|
2018
|
vol. 27
|
issue 4 Special Issue on Logic, Cognition, Argumentation. Guest Editors: Mariusz Urbański, Michiel van Lambalgen and Marcin Koszowy
491-515
EN
The study of fallacies is at the heart of argumentation studies. In response to Hamblin’s devastating critique of the state of the theory of fallacies in 1970, both formal dialectical and informal approaches to fallacies developed. In the current paper, we focus on an influential informal approach to fallacies, part of the pragma-dialectical theory of argumentation. Central to the pragma-dialectical method for analysing and evaluating argumentative discourse is the ideal model of a critical discussion. In this discussion model, a dialectical perspective on argumentation is combined with a pragmatic take on communicative interaction. By formalising and computationally implementing the model of a critical discussion, we take a first step in the development of software to computationally model argumentative dialogue in which fallacies are prohibited along the pragmadialectical norms. We do this by defining the Critical Discussion Game, a formal dialogue game based on the pragma-dialectical discussion model, executable on an online user-interface which is part of a larger infrastructure of argumentation software.
7

Argumentative Polylogues: Beyond Dialectical Understanding of Fallacies

61%
Lewiński M.
Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric
|
2014
|
vol. 36
|
issue 1
193-218
EN
Dialectical fallacies are typically defined as breaches of the rules of a regulated discussion between two participants (di-logue). What if discussions become more complex and involve multiple parties with distinct positions to argue for (poly-logues)? Are there distinct argumentation norms of polylogues? If so, can their violations be conceptualized as polylogical fallacies? I will argue for such an approach and analyze two candidates for argumentative breaches of multi-party rationality: false dilemma and collateral straw man.
8
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Erystyka, moralność i wojna

51%
Szymanek K.
Folia Philosophica
|
2021
|
vol. 45
1-19
EN
The article addresses the ethical aspects of eristic and – more generally – the difficulties people encounter while evaluating debates in moral terms. Simplified and superficial ways to perceive eristical phenomena lead to inadequate assessments. Krzysztof Szymanek objects to the stereotype of eristic as the art of unfair debating and argues that eristical stratagems cannot be considered simpliciter as honest or dishonest without taking into account the circumstances under which arguments are exchanged. He gives and discusses examples of argumentative moves which, on the one hand, are deceptive, but, on the other, lead to the victory of what is right. A comparison of eristical fights to military battles helps to highlight the difficulties in formulating moral judgments about disputes.
PL
Artykuł poświęcony jest etycznym aspektom erystyki i – ogólniej – trudnościom, jakie napotykamy, gdy próbujemy oceniać walkę na argumenty w kategoriach moralnych. Uproszczone, powierzchowne postrzeganie zjawisk na tym polu prowadzi do nieadekwatnych ocen. Autor opowiada się przeciw stereotypowi erystyki jako sztuki nieuczciwej dyskusji, twierdząc, że nie da się chwytów erystycznych rozpatrywać simpliciter jako uczciwych bądź nieuczciwych bez brania pod uwagę okoliczności, w których dochodzi do wymiany argumentów. W tekście przedstawione są przykłady posunięć argumentacyjnych, które z jednej strony mają charakter podstępu, z drugiej jednak przyczyniają się do zwycięstwa tego, co słuszne. Porównanie walki erystycznej do zmagań wojennych pozwala na uwypuklenie trudności w formułowaniu sądów moralnych dotyczących prowadzenia sporów.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.