Bad Arguments and Objectively Bad Arguments

IF 0.9 3区哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY

Informal Logic Pub Date : 2023-03-28 DOI:10.22329/il.v43i1.7076

Michael Hoffmann, R. Catrambone

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Many have argued that it is impossible to determine criteria to identify good arguments. In this contribution, we argue that it is at least possible to identify features of objectively bad arguments. Going beyond Blair and Johnson’s ARS criteria, which state that reasons must be acceptable, relevant, and sufficient, we develop a list of eight criteria with instructions for how to apply them to assess arguments. We conclude by presenting data from two empirical studies that show how frequently students violate these criteria in lab conditions and “in the wild.”

查看原文本刊更多论文

糟糕的论证和客观糟糕的论证

许多人认为，不可能确定确定好论据的标准。在这篇文章中，我们认为至少有可能识别客观上不好的论点的特征。超越布莱尔和约翰逊的ARS标准，即理由必须是可接受的、相关的和充分的，我们制定了一份由八个标准组成的清单，并说明如何将其应用于评估论点。最后，我们展示了两项实证研究的数据，这些数据显示了学生在实验室条件下和“野外”违反这些标准的频率

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

Informal Logic PHILOSOPHY-

CiteScore

1.50

自引率

0.00%

发文量

审稿时长

12 weeks

期刊介绍： Informal Logic publishes articles that advance the dialectic in reasoning and argumentation theory and practice. Primary criteria for the acceptance of articles with a theoretical focus or interest are: (1) the article advances the dialectic or constitutes an interesting comment on it: it presents a cogent argument, objection, interpretation or position that is an advance in relation to the background of issues and controversies on the topic; or it casts the issue addressed in a new and worthwhile light; and (2) the article makes explicit reference to the pertinent literature on its topic, and it discharges the burden of proof imposed by that scholarship. Primary criteria for acceptance of articles devoted to the teaching of informal logic, critical thinking or argumentation include: originality; utility; timeliness; and evidence of the effectiveness of the methods, materials, technologies, etc., proposed. The standard criteria for scholarly publication—topical fit with the subjects covered in the journal; adequacy of coverage to the issue addressed; clarity, organization and literateness of the prose; conceptual clarity and cogency of argumentation—apply ceteris paribus to the selection of all articles, notes and reviews.