A  B  C  D  E  F  G  H  I  J  K  L  M  N  O  P  Q  R  S  T  U  V  W  X  Y  Z  

        1 2 3 4        [Sort alphabetically]   [Restore default list]

  Subjects -> PHILOSOPHY (Total: 762 journals)
Showing 1 - 135 of 135 Journals sorted by number of followers
Philosophical Review     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 70)
Ethics     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 69)
European Journal of Philosophy     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 66)
Journal of Political Philosophy     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 65)
Mind     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 62)
Australasian Journal of Philosophy     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 57)
Philosophy & Public Affairs     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 57)
Contemporary Political Theory     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 52)
Nous     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 51)
International Journal for Philosophy of Religion     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 51)
Journal of the History of Philosophy     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 46)
Philosophical Quarterly     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 46)
Journal of Applied Philosophy     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 43)
American Journal of Theology & Philosophy     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 41)
British Journal for the History of Philosophy     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 41)
British Journal for the Philosophy of Science     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 40)
Analysis     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 36)
Journal of Moral Philosophy     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 36)
Philosophy and Phenomenological Research     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 35)
Philosophy of Science     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 33)
Journal of Medical Ethics     Partially Free   (Followers: 32)
Philosophy and Literature     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 30)
Erkenntnis     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 30)
Journal of Social Philosophy     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 27)
Journal of Ethics & Social Philosophy     Open Access   (Followers: 27)
Inquiry : An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 27)
Constellations     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 26)
Continental Philosophy Review     Partially Free   (Followers: 25)
Canadian Journal of Philosophy     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 25)
Social Philosophy and Policy     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 25)
Ethical Theory and Moral Practice     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 24)
Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 23)
Philosophical Studies     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 22)
Philosophy & Social Criticism     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 22)
Linguistics and Philosophy     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 22)
British Journal of Aesthetics     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 22)
The Heythrop Journal     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 21)
Philosophy and Rhetoric     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 20)
BMC Medical Ethics     Open Access   (Followers: 19)
Philosophy Compass     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 19)
Biology and Philosophy     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 18)
Journal of Medical Ethics and History of Medicine     Open Access   (Followers: 18)
Philosophers' Imprint     Open Access   (Followers: 17)
Philosophy     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 17)
Jurisprudence     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 17)
Assuming Gender     Open Access   (Followers: 16)
Mouseion: Journal of the Classical Association of Canada     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 16)
Pragmatics & Cognition     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 16)
Journal of the Philosophy of History     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 15)
Philosophy East and West     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 15)
International Studies in the Philosophy of Science     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 15)
Bioethics Research Notes     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 15)
Journal of Media Ethics : Exploring Questions of Media Morality     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 14)
Episteme     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 14)
Midwest Studies In Philosophy     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 14)
Philosophy & Technology     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 13)
Phronesis : A journal for Ancient Philosophy     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 13)
Social Epistemology: A Journal of Knowledge, Culture and Policy     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 13)
Review of Philosophy and Psychology     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 13)
Ethical Perspectives     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 12)
Pragmatics and Society     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 12)
Reformed Theological Review, The     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 12)
Journal of Global Ethics     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 12)
Philosophy of Photography     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 11)
Journal of Chinese Philosophy     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 11)
Utilitas     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 11)
Open Journal of Philosophy     Open Access   (Followers: 11)
Journal of Indian Philosophy     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 11)
Philosophy, Psychiatry, & Psychology     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 11)
Polis : The Journal of the Society for Greek Political Thought     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 10)
Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 10)
Estudos Bíblicos     Open Access   (Followers: 10)
Metaphor and Symbol     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 10)
Pacific Philosophical Quarterly     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 10)
Dao : A Journal of Comparative Philosophy     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 10)
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 9)
HTS Theological Studies     Open Access   (Followers: 9)
Film-Philosophy Journal     Open Access   (Followers: 9)
Journal of Philosophical Logic     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 9)
Myth & Symbol     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 9)
Journal of the Gilded Age and Progressive Era     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 9)
Philosophical Books     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 8)
Philosophia     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 8)
Research in Phenomenology     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 8)
Diogenes     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 8)
Philosophical Perspectives     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 8)
African Journal of Business Ethics     Open Access   (Followers: 7)
Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 7)
International Journal of Philosophical Studies     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 7)
Philosophical Issues     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 7)
Nordic Journal of Aesthetics     Open Access   (Followers: 7)
SubStance     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 7)
Contributions to the History of Concepts     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 7)
Metaphilosophy     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 7)
Think     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 6)
Contagion : Journal of Violence, Mimesis, and Culture     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 6)
Contemporary Chinese Thought     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 6)
History and Philosophy of Logic     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 6)
Philosophical Investigations     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 6)
Philosophical Magazine Letters     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 6)
Philosophical Explorations: An International Journal for the Philosophy of Mind and Action     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 6)
Journal of Speculative Philosophy     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 6)
Axiomathes     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 6)
Zeitschrift für philosophische Forschung     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 6)
Dialogue Canadian Philosophical Review/Revue canadienne de philosophie     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 6)
The Southern Journal of Philosophy     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 6)
Journal of Nietzsche Studies     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 5)
Aisthesis     Open Access   (Followers: 5)
Endeavour     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 5)
Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 5)
Philosophical Papers     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 5)
Journal of Critical Realism     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 5)
Critical Horizons     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 5)
Zeitschrift für Religions- und Geistesgeschichte     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 5)
Australasian Catholic Record, The     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 5)
International Journal of the Platonic Tradition     Open Access   (Followers: 5)
Review of Contemporary Philosophy     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 5)
Hume Studies     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 4)
Bochumer Philosophisches Jahrbuch für Antike und Mittelalter     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 4)
Franciscan Studies     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 4)
Church Heritage     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 4)
Philosophy in Review     Open Access   (Followers: 4)
National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 4)
South African Journal of Philosophy = Suid-Afrikaanse Tydskrif vir Wysbegeerte     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 4)
Journal of Theoretical & Philosophical Psychology     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 4)
Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplements     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 4)
Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 4)
The Philosophical Forum     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 4)
Australian Humanist, The     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 3)
Journal of Religion and Business Ethics     Open Access   (Followers: 3)
Studia Logica     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 3)
Utopian Studies     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 3)
Recherches de Théologie et Philosophie Médiévales     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 3)
Topoi     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 3)
Russell : the Journal of Bertrand Russell Studies     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 3)
Studies in Philology     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 3)
CR : The New Centennial Review     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 3)
Kantian Review     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 3)
Bulletin de Philosophie Medievale     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 3)
The Pluralist     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 3)
Bijdragen     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 3)
Socioaffective Neuroscience and Psychology     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
International Journal for the Study of Skepticism     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 2)
International Journal of Žižek Studies     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Erasmus Studies     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 2)
Horizonte : Revista de Estudos de Teologia e Ciências da Religião     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Cultura : International Journal of Philosophy of Culture and Axiology     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Empedocles : European Journal for the Philosophy of Communication     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 2)
Between the Species     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Journal of Friends of Lutheran Archives     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 2)
Journal of Scottish Philosophy     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 2)
Poiesis & Praxis : International Journal of Technology Assessment and Ethics of Science     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Journal of Aesthetic Education     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 2)
Quaestio     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 2)
Sartre Studies International     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 2)
Grazer Philosophische Studien     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 2)
Kriterion: Revista de Filosofia     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Philosophy & Theory in Biology     Open Access   (Followers: 2)
Australian Journal of Parapsychology     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 2)
Éthique publique     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Noesis     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Philosophia Scientiæ     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Revue Philosophique de Louvain     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 1)
Nóema     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
International Journal of Social Quality     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 1)
Revista Latinoamericana de Filosofía     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
PAN: Philosophy Activism Nature     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 1)
Temporalités     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Le Portique     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Ethische Perspectieven     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 1)
Journal of Humanistic Mathematics     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Husserl Studies     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 1)
Veritas : Revista de Filosofí­a y Teología     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Hobbes Studies     Hybrid Journal   (Followers: 1)
Revue d’études benthamiennes     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Laval théologique et philosophique     Full-text available via subscription   (Followers: 1)
Eleutheria     Open Access   (Followers: 1)
Collingwood and British Idealism Studies     Full-text available via subscription  
Grotiana     Hybrid Journal  
Signos Filosóficos     Open Access  
Eidos     Open Access  
Cinta de Moebio     Open Access  
Cuyo Anuario de Filosofía Argentina y Americana     Open Access  
Tópicos. Revista de Filosofía de Santa Fe     Open Access  
Rhuthmos     Open Access  
Philosophiques     Open Access  
Ramon Llull Journal of Applied Ethics     Open Access  
Studia Philosophica Estonica     Open Access  
Synthesis (La Plata)     Open Access  
Revista de Filosofia     Open Access  
Alpha (Osorno)     Open Access  
Circe de clásicos y modernos     Open Access  
Estudios de Filosofía Práctica e Historia de las Ideas     Open Access  
Doctor virtualis     Open Access  
Humanidades Médicas     Open Access  
Methodos     Open Access  
Labyrinthe     Open Access  
Astérion     Open Access  
Trans/Form/Ação - Revista de Filosofia     Open Access  
Russian Studies in Philosophy     Full-text available via subscription  

        1 2 3 4        [Sort alphabetically]   [Restore default list]

Similar Journals
Journal Cover
Informal Logic
Journal Prestige (SJR): 0.277
Citation Impact (citeScore): 1
Number of Followers: 10  

  This is an Open Access Journal Open Access journal
ISSN (Print) 0824-2577
Published by U of Windsor Homepage  [4 journals]
  • From the Editors

    • Authors: Informal Logic
      Pages: 485 - 486
      Abstract: In the issue, Michael Gilbert first considers the history and development of his theory before Leo Groarke helpfully clarifies the differences and affinities between multi-modal and multimodal argumentation. Then, each of Gilbert’s modes is explored in a separate critical study, with David Godden attending to the logical mode, Linda Carroza to the emotional, Claudio Duran the visceral, and Christopher Tindale the kisceral. A final paper by Marko Novak applies the theory (particularly the kisceral mode) to the field of law. Together, these papers offer readers an opportunity to review the range of ideas associated with Gilbert’s model, and set the grounds for continuing research on this important theory.
      PubDate: 2022-09-07
      DOI: 10.22329/il.v42i3.7496
      Issue No: Vol. 42, No. 3 (2022)
       
  • Multi-Modal 2020

    • Authors: Michael A. Gilbert
      Pages: 487 - 506
      Abstract: My essay, “Multi-modal argumentation” was published in the journal, Philosophy of the Social Sciences, in 1994. This information appeared again in my book, Coalescent argumentation in 1997. In the ensuing twenty years, there have been many changes in argumentation theory, and I would like to take this opportunity to examine my now middle-aged theory in light of the developments in our discipline. I will begin by relating how a once keen intended lawyer and then formal logician ended up in argumentation theory. (If you do not care to read this bit of autobiography, skip to Section 2).
      PubDate: 2022-09-07
      DOI: 10.22329/il.v42i3.7497
      Issue No: Vol. 42, No. 3 (2022)
       
  • Gilbert as Disrupter

    • Authors: Leo Groarke
      Pages: 507 - 520
      Abstract: Michael Gilbert’s multi-modal theory of argument challenges earlier accounts of arguing assumed in formal and informal logic. His account of emotional, visceral, and kisceral modes of arguing rejects the assumption that all arguments must be treated as instances of one “logical mode.” This paper compares his alternative modes to other modes proposed by those who have argued for visual, auditory, and other “multimodal” modes of arguing. I conclude that multi-modal and multimodal (without the hyphen) modes are complementary. Collectively, they represent an important attempt to radically expand the scope of informal logic and the argumentation that it studies.
      PubDate: 2022-09-07
      DOI: 10.22329/il.v42i3.7498
      Issue No: Vol. 42, No. 3 (2022)
       
  • Logics for “Non-Logical” Argumentation

    • Authors: David Godden
      Pages: 521 - 562
      Abstract: On Gilbert’s multi-modal theory of argumentation, the “logical” is but one among many modes of argument, including the emotional, the visceral (physical), and the kisceral (intuitive). Yet, I argue that, properly understood, the logical is not one mode among many. Rather, it is better understood as the uber-mode of argument. What Gilbert calls the “logical mode” of argument—a linear, orderly, highly verbalizable, way of arguing—is made possible only to the extent that the logic of some space of reasons has been articulated. The “anti-logical” penchant of multi-modal argumentation is not found at the object-level—in its countenancing “non-logical” modes of argument, but at the meta-level—in its resistance, as a mistaken embracing of the “logical” mode, to using the logics governing the different modes to self-regulate the course of our arguings.
      PubDate: 2022-09-07
      DOI: 10.22329/il.v42i3.7499
      Issue No: Vol. 42, No. 3 (2022)
       
  • Amenable Argumentation Approach

    • Authors: Linda Carozza
      Pages: 563 - 582
      Abstract: This paper summarizes various interpretations of emotional arguments, with a focus on the emotional mode of argument introduced in the multi-modal argumentation model (Gilbert, 1994). From there the author shifts from a descriptive account of emotional arguments to a discussion about a normative framework. Pointing out problems with evaluative models of the emotional mode, a paradigmatic shift captured by the Amenable Argumentation Approach is explained as a way forward for the advancement of the emotional mode and multi-modal argumentation.
      PubDate: 2022-09-07
      DOI: 10.22329/il.v42i3.7500
      Issue No: Vol. 42, No. 3 (2022)
       
  • Reflections on the Physical or Visceral Mode of Argumentation in Michael
           Gilbert’s Theory of Multi-Modal Argumentation and its Relation to
           Gesture Studies and The Embodied Mind

    • Authors: Claudio Duran
      Pages: 583 - 601
      Abstract:  In this paper I question the primacy of argumentation relying solely on logic by showing how the body and mind are deeply connected and as a result how communication and argumentation are a product of this mind/body connection. In particular, I explore the physicality of argumentation through the research and writings on gestures and the embodied mind. Michael Gilbert’s theory of multi-modal argumentation provides the general approach for this elaboration.
      PubDate: 2022-09-07
      DOI: 10.22329/il.v42i3.7502
      Issue No: Vol. 42, No. 3 (2022)
       
  • On the Kisceral Mode of Argumentation

    • Authors: Christopher Tindale
      Pages: 603 - 621
      Abstract: Of the different modes that characterize Michael Gilbert’s multi-modal theory of argumentation, the kisceral is in many ways the most challenging to understand and employ. It appears to bypass the processes of reason that have dominated accounts in the Western tradition, diverting us toward the private worlds of hunches and gut reactions. This paper explores the nature of kisceral arguments, comparing them to the way intuition operates in William James’ examination of mystical experience. Having provided an account of kisceral arguments and their operation, the discussion turns to the even more challenging issue of how such arguments should be evaluated.
      PubDate: 2022-09-07
      DOI: 10.22329/il.v42i3.7501
      Issue No: Vol. 42, No. 3 (2022)
       
  • Kisceral Argumentation in Law

    • Authors: Marko Novak
      Pages: 623 - 652
      Abstract: Gilbert's kisceral argumentation is, roughly speaking, about arguing based on intuitions. In the forefront of such a (rhetorical) model are arguers and audiences, who resolve disagreements using kisceral arguments. Intuitions as reasons were more important in pre-modern law, when the law was not as explicit, precise, and determinate as today. Law influenced by religion or religious law was a typical example. In our much more secular modern era, intuitions are more or less subordinated to the (legal) logical mode of arguing. However, in tough legal cases, when logic "runs out," it is values that decide them. Not surprisingly, neuroscience and cognitive psychology have shown a strong connection between values and intuition. 
      PubDate: 2022-09-07
      DOI: 10.22329/il.v42i3.7503
      Issue No: Vol. 42, No. 3 (2022)
       
  • Notice of Books Received

    • Authors: Informal Logic
      Pages: 653 - 667
      PubDate: 2022-09-07
      DOI: 10.22329/il.v42i3.7504
      Issue No: Vol. 42, No. 3 (2022)
       
  • Identifying Linked and Convergent Argument Structures

    • Authors: Shiyang Yu, Frank Zenker
      Pages: 363 - 387
      Abstract: To analyze the argument structure, the linked vs convergent distinction is crucial. In applying this distinction, argumentation scholars test for variations of argument strength under premise revision. A relevance-based test assesses whether an argument’s premises are individually relevant to its conclusion, while a support-based test assesses whether premises support the conclusion independently. Both criteria presuppose that evaluating an argument’s strength is methodologically prior to identifying its structure. Yet, if ‘argument structure’ is a concept of analysis, then a structural analysis would precede evaluating an argument’s strength. We problematize that state-of-the-art methods to identify structures fail, because they rely on evaluative judgments, and so “put the cart before the horse.”
      PubDate: 2022-06-10
      DOI: 10.22329/il.v42i1.7133
      Issue No: Vol. 42, No. 2 (2022)
       
  • A Modal Criterion for Epistemic Argumentation

    • Authors: Job de Grefte
      Pages: 389 - 415
      Abstract: In this paper, I spell out and argue for a new epistemic theory of argumentation. Contrary to extant views, this theory is compatible with a pluralistic framework on argumentation, where the norms governing argumentation depend on the aim with which we engage in the practice. A domain of specifically epistemic argumentation is singled out, and I argue based on recent findings in modal epistemology that this domain is governed by the modal norm of safety; where a belief is safe just in case it is produced by a method that would not easily produce a false belief. While this criterion is well-known and uncontroversial in epistemology, it has hitherto not been applied to epistemic theories of argumentation. I show that the norm allows for a novel and superior perspective of the relevance of the persistent interlocutor in argumentation theory, and on the relation between dialectical and epistemic norms more generally.
      PubDate: 2022-06-10
      DOI: 10.22329/il.v42i2.7020
      Issue No: Vol. 42, No. 2 (2022)
       
  • Deeper into Argumentative Bullshit

    • Authors: Nikil Mukerji, Adriano Mannino
      Pages: 439 - 470
      Abstract: In a recent paper, José Ángel Gascón extends the Frankfurtian notion of bullshit to the sphere of argumentation. On Frankfurt’s view, the hallmark of bullshit is a lack of concern for the truth of an utterance on the part of the bullshitter. Similarly, Gascón argues, the hallmark of argumentative bullshit should be viewed as a lack of concern for whether the reasons that are adduced for a claim genuinely support that claim. Gascón deserves credit for drawing attention to the idea of argumentative bullshit. Nevertheless, we argue, his treatment leaves room for further refinement as he fails to clarify important points and misidentifies several features of argumentative bullshit. In particular, Gascón’s account fails to accommodate non-Frankfurtian forms of argumentative bullshit. This paper aims to amend and extend his proposal and proposes a general account that can encompass both Frankfurtian and non-Frankfurtian forms of argumentative bullshit.
      PubDate: 2022-06-10
      DOI: 10.22329/il.v42i2.7005
      Issue No: Vol. 42, No. 2 (2022)
       
  • Notice of Books Received

    • Authors: Informal Logic
      Pages: 471 - 484
      PubDate: 2022-06-10
      DOI: 10.22329/il.v42i2.7384
      Issue No: Vol. 42, No. 2 (2022)
       
  • Notice of Books Received

    • Authors: Informal Logic
      PubDate: 2022-05-05
      DOI: 10.22329/il.v40i4.6571
      Issue No: Vol. 42, No. 1 (2022)
       
  • Introduction to the Special Issue

    • Authors: Fabrizio Macagno, Alice Toniolo
      Pages: 1 - 23
      Abstract: Douglas Walton’s work is extremely vast, multifaceted, and interdisciplinary. He developed theoretical proposals that have been used in disciplines that are not traditionally related to philosophy, such as law, education, discourse analysis, artificial intelligence, or medical communication. Through his papers and books, Walton redefined the boundaries not only of argumentation theory, but also logic and philosophy. He was a philosopher in the sense that his interest was developing theoretical models that can help explain reality, and more importantly interact with it. For this reason, he proposed methods that have been used for analyzing different types of dialogical interactions, and modeling procedures for regulating them.
      PubDate: 2022-03-16
      DOI: 10.22329/il.v42i1.7210
      Issue No: Vol. 42, No. 1 (2022)
       
  • Is Every Definition Persuasive'

    • Authors: Jakub Pruś, Andrew Aberdein
      Pages: 25 - 47
      Abstract: “Is every definition persuasive'” If essentialist views on definition are rejected and a pragmatic account adopted, where defining is a speech act which fixes the meaning of a term, then a problem arises: if meanings are not fixed by the essence of being itself, is not every definition persuasive' To address the problem, we refer to Douglas Walton’s impressive intellectual heritage—specifically on the argumentative potential of definition. In finding some non-persuasive definitions, we show not every definition is persuasive. The persuasiveness lies not in syntactic or semantic properties, but the context. We present this pragmatic account and provide rules for analysing and evaluating persuasive definition—a promising direction for further research.
      PubDate: 2022-03-16
      DOI: 10.22329/il.v42i1.7211
      Issue No: Vol. 42, No. 1 (2022)
       
  • A Pragmatic Account of Rephrase in Argumentation

    • Authors: Marcin Koszowy, Steve Oswald, Katarzyna Budzynska, Barbara Konat, Pascal Gygax
      Pages: 49 - 82
      Abstract: In the spirit of the pragmatic account of quotation and reporting offered by Macagno and Walton (2017), we outline a systematic pragmatic account of rephrasing. For this purpose, we combine two interrelated methods of inquiry into the variety of uses of rephrase as a persuasive device: (i) the annotation of rephrase types to identify locutionary and illocutionary aspects of rephrase, (ii) the crowd–sourced examination of rephrase types to investigate their perlocutionary effects. As it draws on Waltonian insights and on empirical and experimental research on the (mis)use of rephrase, our approach allows us to ground a novel theoretically–informed and data–driven pragmatic account of rephrase.
      PubDate: 2022-03-16
      DOI: 10.22329/il.v42i1.7212
      Issue No: Vol. 42, No. 1 (2022)
       
  • Argumentation Profiles

    • Authors: Fabrizio Macagno
      Pages: 83 - 138
      Abstract: An argumentation profile is defined as a methodological instrument for analyzing argumentative discourse considering distinct and interrelated dimensions: the types of argument used, their quality, and the emotions triggered. Walton’s theoretical contributions are developed as a coherent analytical and multifaceted toolbox for capturing these aspects. Argumentation schemes are used to detect and quantify the types of argument. Fallacy analysis and the assessment of the implicit premises retrieved through the schemes allow evaluating arguments. Finally, the frequency of emotive words signals the most common emotions aroused. This method is illustrated through a corpus of argumentative tweets of three politicians.      
      PubDate: 2022-03-16
      DOI: 10.22329/il.v42i1.7215
      Issue No: Vol. 42, No. 1 (2022)
       
  • Douglas Walton’s Contributions in Education

    • Authors: Chrysi Rapanta
      Pages: 139 - 170
      Abstract: Douglas Walton, perhaps the most prolific author in Argumentation theory, has been of a great influence in the fields of Informal logic, Artificial intelligence, and Law. His contributions in the field of educational research, in particular in the field of argumentation and education, are less known. This review paper aims at shedding light on those aspects of Walton’s theory that have received educational researchers’ attention thus far, as well identifying existing lacks of consideration and open paths for future research.
      PubDate: 2022-03-16
      DOI: 10.22329/il.v42i1.7222
      Issue No: Vol. 42, No. 1 (2022)
       
  • Argumentation as a Collaborative Enterprise

    • Authors: Mark Felton, Amanda Crowell
      Pages: 171 - 202
      Abstract: Studies of adolescents and young-adults suggest that deliberative dialogue, a form of consensus-seeking argumentation, leads to stronger learning outcomes than persuasive dialogue. However, this research has not been informed by an analysis of dialogue among more experienced arguers. In the present study, we compare the deliberative and persuasive dialogues of novice and experienced arguers to better understand the difference between these two forms of discourse at differing levels of argumentative expertise. Our results confirm theoretical distinctions between deliberation and persuasion. Results also suggest that greater experience in argumentation is associated with a richer array of argumentative purposes, producing more cohesive, intersubjective and dialectically relevant dialogue. The implications of these findings for learning are discussed.
      PubDate: 2022-03-16
      Issue No: Vol. 42, No. 1 (2022)
       
  • An Epistemological Appraisal of Walton’s Argument Schemes

    • Authors: Christoph Lumer
      Pages: 203 - 290
      Abstract: The article critically discusses Walton’s (and co-authors’) argument scheme approach to good argumentation. Four characteristics of Walton’s approach are presented: 1. Argument schemes provide normative requirements. 2. These schemata are enthymematic. 3. There are associated critical questions. 4. The method is inductive, abstracting schemata from groups of similar arguments. Four adequacy conditions are applied to these characteristics: AC1: effectiveness in achieving the epistemic goal of obtaining and communicating justified acceptable opinions; AC2: completeness in capturing the good argument types; AC3: efficiency in achieving the goals; AC4: justification of the argument schemes. The discussion reveals weaknesses in Walton’s account, including they are neither effective nor truly justified. A better alternative is an epistemological approach based on epistemological principles.
      PubDate: 2022-03-16
      DOI: 10.22329/il.v42i1.7224
      Issue No: Vol. 42, No. 1 (2022)
       
  • Burdens of Proposing

    • Authors: David Godden, Simon Wells
      Pages: 291 - 342
      Abstract: This paper considers the probative burdens of proposing action or policy options in deliberation dialogues. Do proposers bear a burden of proof' Building on pioneering work by Douglas Walton (2010), and following on a growing literature within computer science, the prevailing answer seems to be “No.” Instead, only recommenders—agents who put forward an option as the one to be taken—bear a burden of proof. Against this view, we contend that proposers have burdens of proof with respect to their proposals. Specifically, we argue that, while recommenders that Φ bear a burden of proof to show that □Φ (We should / ought to / must Φ), proposers that Φ have a burden of proof to show that ◇Φ (We may / can Φ). A burden of proposing may be defined as <P, Φi, ◇Φ>, which reads: Those who propose that we might Φ are obliged, if called upon, to show that Φ is possible in any of four ways which we call worldly, deontic, instrumental, and practical. So understood, burdens of proposing satisfy the standard formal definition of burden of proof.
      PubDate: 2022-03-16
      DOI: 10.22329/il.v42i1.7225
      Issue No: Vol. 42, No. 1 (2022)
       
  • Notice of Books Received

    • Authors: Informal Logic
      Pages: 343 - 357
      PubDate: 2022-03-16
      DOI: 10.22329/il.v42i1.7226
      Issue No: Vol. 42, No. 1 (2022)
       
  • In Memoriam

    • Authors: Dale Hample
      Pages: 359 - 361
      PubDate: 2022-03-16
      DOI: 10.22329/il.v42i1.7227
      Issue No: Vol. 42, No. 1 (2022)
       
 
JournalTOCs
School of Mathematical and Computer Sciences
Heriot-Watt University
Edinburgh, EH14 4AS, UK
Email: journaltocs@hw.ac.uk
Tel: +00 44 (0)131 4513762
 


Your IP address: 3.215.190.193
 
Home (Search)
API
About JournalTOCs
News (blog, publications)
JournalTOCs on Twitter   JournalTOCs on Facebook

JournalTOCs © 2009-