How To Argue (And How Not To)

Abstract

I distinguish arguments and arguing and I explain some important logical features of arguments. I then explain how philosophers have been misled, apparently by Euclid, into giving seriously mistaken accounts of arguing. I give a few examples. I then offer a seven-step guide on how to argue. After that, I conclude.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,386

External links

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

Through your library

  • Only published works are available at libraries.

Similar books and articles

The Contrast Between Dogmatic and Critical Arguments.Danny Frederick - 2015 - Organon F: Medzinárodný Časopis Pre Analytickú Filozofiu 22 (1):9-20.
Where Do Sounds Fit Within Informal Logic?Leo Groarke - 2018 - Informal Logic 38 (3):362-368.
Virtues, Evidence, and Ad Hominem Arguments.Patrick Bondy - 2015 - Informal Logic 35 (4):450-466.
Is Formal Logic a Science About Rational Arguments?Svatopluk Nevrkla - 2011 - Organon F: Medzinárodný Časopis Pre Analytickú Filozofiu 18 (4):499-511.
Emotion, Argumentation and Informal Logic.Michael A. Gilbert - 2004 - Informal Logic 24 (3):245-264.
How Philosophical is Informal Logic?John Woods - 2000 - Informal Logic 20 (2).
Informal logic and epistemology.R. H. Johnson - 2007 - Anthropology and Philosophy 8 (1-2):69-88.
Falsificationism and the Pragmatic Problem of Induction.Danny Frederick - 2020 - Organon F: Medzinárodný Časopis Pre Analytickú Filozofiu 27 (4):494-503.

Analytics

Added to PP
2020-08-12

Downloads
236 (#82,531)

6 months
68 (#63,681)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references