哲学家辩论述评：罗素-科普尔斯顿辩论中的对抗性合作

IF 0.9 3区哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY

Informal Logic Pub Date : 2023-03-28 DOI:10.22329/il.v43i1.7835

Leo Groarke

引用次数: 1

摘要

本文回顾了Fernando Leal和Hubert Marraud的《哲学家如何论证：罗素-科普尔斯顿辩论中的对抗性合作》（Springer 2022）。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Review of How Philosophers Argue: An Adversarial Collaboration on the Russell-Copleston Debate

This article reviews Fernando Leal and Hubert Marraud’s How Philosopher’s Argue: An Adversarial Collaboration on the Russell-Copleston Debate (Springer 2022).

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

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.