What is a “Real” Argument?
نویسنده
چکیده
Numerous informal logicians and argumentation theorists restrict their theorizing to what they call “real” arguments. But is there a clear distinction to be made between “real” and “non-real” arguments? Here I explore four possible accounts of the alleged distinction and argue that none can serve the theoretical uses to which the distinction is most often put. Résumé: Plusieurs logiciens non formels et théoriciens de l’argumentation limitent leur construction de théories à ce qu’ils appellent des arguments « authentiques ». Mais y-at’il une distinction claire entre des arguments« authentiques » et « inauthentiques » ? Ici j’explore quatre descriptions possibles de cette prétendue distinction et je soutiens qu’aucune ne répond aux besoins théoriques auxquels elles sont censées répondre.
منابع مشابه
Thinking as Evidence for the Probability of the Existence of a God: An Argument from Unnaturalness for Necessity
The objective of this article is to show that it is justified to assert that the existence of God is plausible, considering the fact that thinking itself is an immediate outcome (effect) of a thinker (cause). This idea may seem evident, but it is in fact challenged by certain claims of cognitive philosophers who aver that our knowledge of necessity and causation is, i...
متن کاملWhy We Still Do Not Know What a “Real” Argument Is
In his recent paper, “What a Real Argument is,” Ben Hamby attempts to provide an adequate theoretical account of “real” arguments. In this paper I present and evaluate both Hamby’s motivation for distinguishing “real” from non-“real” arguments and his articulation of the distinction. I argue that neither is adequate to ground a theoretically significant class of “real” arguments, for the articu...
متن کاملA Psychoanalytic Reading of Cyberspace: Problematizing the Digitalization of Oedipus Complex and the Dialectic of Subjectivity and Castration in the Cyberspace
In the present paper, a translational model to psychoanalyze the cyberspace is presented with the argument that cyberspace is a translated version of human unconscious that projects both our unfulfilled desires and suppressed anxieties. This Freudian-based line of argument is followed by Lacanian (1950s)and Zizekian (2004) psychoanalysis to problematize the digitalization of Oedipus complex and...
متن کاملHow to Escape Irrelevance: Performance Philosophy, Public Philosophy and Borderless Philosophy
Carlo Cellucci has rightly pointed out that contemporary professional academic philosophy has a serious problem of irrelevance. Performance philosophy and public philosophy are two recent attempts to solve that problem and radically transform professional academic philosophy into what I call real philosophy. Nevertheless, performance philosophy and public philosophy have some prima facie probl...
متن کاملReview and Analysis of the concepts of Terms Rabb "the Lord" and Borhan "Argument" in the Verses 23 and 24 of the Surah Yusuf
The present paper seeks to review, analyze, and criticize the concepts of the terms "the Lord" and "argument" , with regard to other exegeses. Using a descriptive-analytical and library method, and software tools, it seeks to identify the exact meanings of these terms, recognize some weak and inconsistent hadiths used in this exegesis, and avoid incorrect exegeses which challenge prophet Yusuf'...
متن کاملWhat is Hacking's argument for entity realism?
According to Ian Hacking’s Entity Realism, unobservable entities that scientists carefully manipulate to study other phenomena are real. Although Hacking presents his case in an intuitive, attractive, and persuasive way, his argument remains elusive. I present five possible readings of Hacking’s argument: a no‐miracle argument, an indispensability argument, a transcendental argument, a Vichian ...
متن کامل