Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Groundwork in the Theory of ArgumentationRelevance, Acceptability and Sufficiency Today

Groundwork in the Theory of Argumentation: Relevance, Acceptability and Sufficiency Today [The chapter is a reconsideration of the three criteria of a logically good argument—relevance, acceptability and sufficiency—30 years after Johnson and Blair introduced them in Logical Self-Defense (1977). The primary role of relevance is in the interpretation of discourse and judgments of probative relevance to identify the components of arguments to be found therein. Both acceptability and sufficiency are best understood as placeholders. In the case of acceptability, the use to which the argument is being put makes a difference. Similarly for sufficiency. Special fields such as the various sciences or professions will have standards peculiar to them for arguments about their subject matters. General guidelines for such things as the credibility of testimony or the trustworthiness of one’s own experience can be and have been formulated. Thorough arguments will have a dialectical dimension as well, with objections to the thesis or to the arguments for it acknowledged and answers to them provided.] http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png

Groundwork in the Theory of ArgumentationRelevance, Acceptability and Sufficiency Today

Part of the Argumentation Library Book Series (volume 21)
Editors: Tindale, Christopher W.
Blair, J. Anthony
Groundwork in the Theory of Argumentation — Aug 29, 2011
Download PDF
13 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/springer-journals/groundwork-in-the-theory-of-argumentation-relevance-acceptability-and-p0nDMe3nY8

References (15)

Publisher
Springer Netherlands
Copyright
© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012
ISBN
978-94-007-2362-7
Pages
87 –100
DOI
10.1007/978-94-007-2363-4_8
Publisher site
See Chapter on Publisher Site

Abstract

[The chapter is a reconsideration of the three criteria of a logically good argument—relevance, acceptability and sufficiency—30 years after Johnson and Blair introduced them in Logical Self-Defense (1977). The primary role of relevance is in the interpretation of discourse and judgments of probative relevance to identify the components of arguments to be found therein. Both acceptability and sufficiency are best understood as placeholders. In the case of acceptability, the use to which the argument is being put makes a difference. Similarly for sufficiency. Special fields such as the various sciences or professions will have standards peculiar to them for arguments about their subject matters. General guidelines for such things as the credibility of testimony or the trustworthiness of one’s own experience can be and have been formulated. Thorough arguments will have a dialectical dimension as well, with objections to the thesis or to the arguments for it acknowledged and answers to them provided.]

Published: Aug 29, 2011

Keywords: Relevance; Acceptability; Sufficiency; Logically good arguments

There are no references for this article.