| Título: | Defeasible Classifications and Inferences from Definitions |
| Autores: |
Walton, Douglas Macagno, Fabrizio; Catholic University of Milan |
| Fecha: | 2010-03-19 |
| Publicador: | Informal logic |
| Fuente: |
 |
| Tipo: |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion research-article conceptual analysis; normative analysis |
| Tema: |
informal logic; linguistics; law argumentation schemes; inference; common knowledge; classifications |
| Descripción: | We contend that it is possible to argue reasonably for and against arguments from classifications and definitions, provided they are seen as defeasible (subject to exceptions and critical questioning). Arguments from classification of the most common sorts are shown to be based on defeasible reasoning of various kinds represented by patterns of logical reasoning called defeasible argumentation schemes. We show how such schemes can be identified with heuristics, or short-cut solutions to a problem. We examine a variety of arguments of this sort, including argument from abductive classification, argument from causal classification, argument from analogy-based classification and arguments from classification based on generalizations. |
| Idioma: | Inglés |
1 Why Critical Thinking Should Be Combined With Written Composition por Hatcher, Donald L. | 6 There is no Fallacy of Arguing from Authority por Coleman, Edwin |
2 Teaching Argument Construction por Kingsbury, Justine | 7 Book Abstracts por , |
3 Logic, Art and Argument por Groarke, Leo | 8 Are "Gap-Fillers" Missing Premisses? por Grennan, Wayne |
4 From the Editors por , | 9 Kvanvig`s The Intellectual Virtues and the Life of the Mind por Driver, Julia |
5 | 10 Book Abstracts por , |