Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
Loading next page...
/lp/springer-journals/how-philosophers-argue-introduction-5EZjP4tWrR
References (7)
-
Hubert Marraud (2019)
On the Logical Ways to Counter an Argument: A Typology and Some Theoretical ConsequencesArgumentation Library
-
G. Latham, M. Erez, E. Locke (1988)
Resolving scientific disputes by the joint design of crucial experiments by the antagonists: Application to the Erez–Latham dispute regarding participation in goal setting.Journal of Applied Psychology, 73
-
B. Mellers, R. Hertwig, D. Kahneman (2001)
Do Frequency Representations Eliminate Conjunction Effects? An Exercise in Adversarial CollaborationPsychological Science, 12
-
P. Copan (2021)
ATHEISM AND THEISM:The Inherence of Human Dignity
-
S. James (1997)
Collected Papers of Bertrand Russell, Volume 11: : Last Philosophical Testament 1943‐1968 -
(2016)
Pevsner: The BBC Years -
Jay Corrin (2013)
Catholic Progressives in England after Vatican II
- Publisher
- Springer International Publishing
- Copyright
- © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2022
- ISBN
- 978-3-030-85367-9
- Pages
- 1 –19
- DOI
- 10.1007/978-3-030-85368-6_1
- Publisher site
- See Chapter on Publisher Site
Abstract
[The purpose of this introduction is, first, to describe the text of the famous Russell-Copleston 1948 debate, which we propose to analyze from the vantage point of two different argumentation theories, pragma-dialectics (van Eemeren, 2018) and argument dialectics (Marraud, 2020c); next to justify why we chose precisely that text; and finally, to explain briefly the way in which we performed the analysis, namely by what is called "adversarial collaboration" (Kahneman, 2013).]
Published: Feb 21, 2022