The normativity of logic and the natural normativity of argumentation

Alba Massolo
{"title":"The normativity of logic and the natural normativity of argumentation","authors":"Alba Massolo","doi":"10.15366/ria2024.28.002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this paper, I defend that logic has a normative status for reasoning. To support my argument, I question whether logic can be limited to a formal calculus that establishes relations among truth-bearers (Goldstein, 1988). Instead, I argue that logic encompasses the study of inference in ordinary language. Similarly, I challenge traditional views of reasoning that depict it as a private process of drawing inferences. Instead, I embrace perspectives that view reasoning as a social activity (Dutilh-Novaes, 2021; Godden, 2015; Kalis, 2022; Mackenzie, 1989). From these bases, I explore the concept of the natural normativity of argumentation (Gilbert, 2007; Jackson, 2019). Since argumentative practices inherently possess a normative dimension, logic aims to capture and represent the rules that govern these linguistic exchanges. Logical rules are the tools from which agents can exert normative control over argumentative practices.","PeriodicalId":509931,"journal":{"name":"Revista Iberoamericana de Argumentación","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista Iberoamericana de Argumentación","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15366/ria2024.28.002","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In this paper, I defend that logic has a normative status for reasoning. To support my argument, I question whether logic can be limited to a formal calculus that establishes relations among truth-bearers (Goldstein, 1988). Instead, I argue that logic encompasses the study of inference in ordinary language. Similarly, I challenge traditional views of reasoning that depict it as a private process of drawing inferences. Instead, I embrace perspectives that view reasoning as a social activity (Dutilh-Novaes, 2021; Godden, 2015; Kalis, 2022; Mackenzie, 1989). From these bases, I explore the concept of the natural normativity of argumentation (Gilbert, 2007; Jackson, 2019). Since argumentative practices inherently possess a normative dimension, logic aims to capture and represent the rules that govern these linguistic exchanges. Logical rules are the tools from which agents can exert normative control over argumentative practices.
逻辑的规范性和论证的自然规范性
在本文中,我将为逻辑在推理中的规范地位辩护。为了支持我的论点,我质疑逻辑是否可以局限于一种形式化的微积分,这种微积分建立了真理承担者之间的关系(戈德斯坦,1988 年)。相反,我认为逻辑学包含了对普通语言推理的研究。同样,我对将推理描绘成私人推论过程的传统推理观提出质疑。相反,我接受将推理视为一种社会活动的观点(Dutilh-Novaes, 2021; Godden, 2015; Kalis, 2022; Mackenzie, 1989)。在这些基础上,我探讨了论证的自然规范性概念(吉尔伯特,2007;杰克逊,2019)。由于论证实践本质上具有规范性维度,逻辑学旨在捕捉和表述支配这些语言交流的规则。逻辑规则是代理人对论证实践进行规范性控制的工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信