Arguments that Backfire

In D. Hitchcock & D. Farr (eds.), The Uses of Argument. OSSA. pp. 58-65 (2005)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

One result of successful argumentation – able arguers presenting cogent arguments to competent audiences – is a transfer of credibility from premises to conclusions. From a purely logical perspective, neither dubious premises nor fallacious inference should lower the credibility of the target conclusion. Nevertheless, some arguments do backfire this way. Dialectical and rhetorical considerations come into play. Three inter-related conclusions emerge from a catalogue of hapless arguers and backfiring arguments. First, there are advantages to paying attention to arguers and their contexts, rather than focusing narrowly on their arguments, in order to understand what can go wrong in argumentation. Traditional fallacy identification, with its exclusive attention to faulty inferences, is inadequate to explain the full range of argumentative failures. Second, the notion of an Ideal Arguer can be defined by contrast with her less than ideal peers to serve as a useful tool in argument evaluation. And third, not all of the ways that arguers raise doubts about their conclusions are pathological. On the contrary, some ways that doubts are raised concerning our intended conclusions are an integral part of ideal argumentative practice.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 90,616

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Self-referential arguments in philosophy.Elke Brendel - 2007 - Grazer Philosophische Studien 74 (1):177-197.
Who Needs Valid Moral Arguments?Mark T. Nelson - 2003 - Argumentation 17 (1):35-42.
Faith and the Existence of God.R. G. Swinburne - 1988 - Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement 24:121-143.
Arguments & Arguers.Michael A. Gilbert - 1995 - Teaching Philosophy 18 (2):125-138.
Black Box Arguments.Sally Jackson - 2008 - Argumentation 22 (3):437-446.
Is Formal Logic a Science About Rational Arguments?Svatopluk Nevrkla - 2011 - Organon F: Medzinárodný Časopis Pre Analytickú Filozofiu 18 (4):499-511.
The Possibility of Inductive Moral Arguments.Mark T. Nelson - 2006 - Philosophical Papers 35 (2):231-246.
Mapping the Structure of Debate.Jeff Yoshimi - 2004 - Informal Logic 24 (1):1-22.
On Knockdown Arguments.John A. Keller - 2015 - Erkenntnis 80 (6):1205-1215.

Analytics

Added to PP
2015-04-02

Downloads
54 (#264,197)

6 months
6 (#203,358)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Daniel Cohen
Colby College