Titlebook: ;

糾纏,纏繞

What Is the Right Amount of Support for a Conclusion?osition, .?” Two answers, deductivism and the Pragma-Dialectical theory, are considered and rejected. It is argued that an argument’s support for its conclusion will be sufficient when it meets its burdens of proof, relying in the final analysis on what may be presumed or accepted without further qu

無(wú)法解釋

大酒杯

textile

Postmenopause

The “Logic” of Informal Logicnd induction. I briefly describe and characterize six accounts that seem on the face of it to portray some third type of assessment of an illative move, independent of deductive validity and of inductive strength: those of Wisdom, Toulmin, Wellman, Rescher, defeasible reasoning theorists such as Pol

克制

mechanical

Walton’s Argumentation Schemes for Presumptive Reasoning: A Critique and Developmentof what is missing from the account as presented by Walton. I argue that the relation between argumentation and reasoning as it relates to schemes needs to be explained; the problems of classification of schemes within broad types needs to be addressed; a distinction is needed between descriptive an

RAG

帶來(lái)墨水

Towards a Philosophy of Argumentments being put to a wide range of uses and that frees the definition of argument from association with any particular use. The goal is to construct a framework in terms of which various particular theories of argument can be seen to have their place, and the various controversies in the field of ar

ANT