About this topic
| Summary | Informal Logic is not an alternative to formal logic. It is, broadly, the normative philosophical study of reasoning, inference and argumentation in natural language. Informal logic seeks to provide advice to "real life" arguers in the hopes of enabling them to argue more reasonably, to avoid fallacies, and to achieve greater success in persuasion through cogent, well-reasoned argumentation. Another goal of informal logic is to improve the teaching of reasoning skills. Some issues that might be considered distinctive to informal logic include: the metaphysical question of whether arguments are abstract objects, events, or something else, what makes arguments in natural languages good or bad, the relationship between argument and justification, theories of virtuous arguing, the nature of fallacies, the problem of deep disagreement between both peer and non-peer arguers, the nature of multi-modal arguments (arguments critically involving non-linguistic elements like images or sounds), and how to achieve more socially just norms and practices of everyday argumentation. |
| Key works | Many of the interests now gathered under the banner of informal logic well predate the emergence of the field as a distinct area of study. Arguably, the tradition begins with Aristotle, the Organon and the Rhetoric both being of central relevance. The first section of Hansen & Pinto 1995 contains entries by writers like Locke, Whately, and Mill, all of whom are important for the history of informal logic. In the 20th century, Hamblin 1970, Toulmin 1958, and Perelman 1969 are considered seminal works in the field. Wellman 1971 is important because it is a point of continuity between the history of attempts in ethics to arrive at standards of good moral reasoning distinct from the canons of formal deductive logic, and informal logic's broader attempt to do the same. A good guide to the early history of informal logic can be found in Johnson 1996. It is also important to note the confluence between early work on critical thinking and informal logic. This is captured in Johnson 2012. |
| Introductions | Walton 2008 and Govier 1985 are accessible textbooks by two of the field's most influential writers. Important technical treatments showcasing the current diversity of approaches within informal logic include the following: Pinto 2003, Tindale 2013, Johnson 2000, Freeman 2005, Walton et al 2008, Hitchcock 2006, Groarke 2015 and Finocchiaro 2013. |
Show all references
Related categories
Siblings:
- Dialetheism (190)
- Epistemology of Logic (186)
- Logical Expressivism (28)
- Logical Pluralism (185)
- Logic and Information (214)
- Logic in Philosophy (195)
- Model Theory (6,283)
- Proof Theory (2,694)
- Set Theory (2,250 | 494)
- Mathematical Logic (1,020)
- Introductions to Logic (162)
- Logic and Philosophy of Logic, General Works (641)
- Logic and Philosophy of Logic, Misc (1,108)
Jobs in this area
Postdoctoral Research Associate
Post Doc Fellow
Assistant Professor of Philosophy
Jobs from PhilJobs
5218 found
Order:
1 filter applied
|
Off-campus access
Using PhilPapers from home?
Create an account to enable off-campus access through your institution's proxy server. Monitor this page
Be alerted of all new items appearing on this page. Choose how you want to monitor it:
Editorial team
General Editors:
David Bourget (Western Ontario) David Chalmers (ANU, NYU) Area Editors: David Bourget Gwen Bradford Berit Brogaard Margaret Cameron David Chalmers James Chase Rafael De Clercq Ezio Di Nucci Barry Hallen Hans Halvorson Jonathan Ichikawa Michelle Kosch Øystein Linnebo JeeLoo Liu Paul Livingston Brandon Look Manolo Martínez Matthew McGrath Michiru Nagatsu Susana Nuccetelli Giuseppe Primiero Jack Alan Reynolds Darrell P. Rowbottom Aleksandra Samonek Constantine Sandis Howard Sankey Jonathan Schaffer Thomas Senor Robin Smith Daniel Star Jussi Suikkanen Lynne Tirrell Aness Kim Webster Other editors Contact us Learn more about PhilPapers |
