AbstractThe deep operation of androcentrism in scientific argumentation demands recognition as a form of fallacy. On Walton’s account, fallacies are serious mistakes in argumentation that employ presumptions acceptable in other circumstances. There are only isolated cases in which androcentric pre-sumptions are acceptable, and I argue that androcentrism affects an overarching theme of generalization in science rather than an isolated scheme. Androcentrism is related to other ways of treating privileged people as exemplary humans, whose negative impact on processes of argumentation can be described as the fallacy of “appeal to the standard.”
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
References found in this work
Science as Social Knowledge: Values and Objectivity in Scientific Inquiry.Helen E. Longino (ed.) - 1990 - Princeton University Press.
Similar books and articles
Rethinking the Fallacy of Hasty Generalization.Douglas Walton - 1999 - Argumentation 13 (2):161-182.
That’s No Argument! The Dialectic of Non-Argumentation.Jan Laar & Erik Krabbe - 2015 - Synthese 192 (4):1173-1197.
The Blaze of Her Splendors: Suggestions About Revitalizing Fallacy Theory. [REVIEW]Ralph H. Johnson - 1987 - Argumentation 1 (3):239-253.
The Fallacy of Many Questions: On the Notions of Complexity, Loadedness and Unfair Entrapment in Interrogative Theory. [REVIEW]Douglas Walton - 1999 - Argumentation 13 (4):379-383.
The Straw Thing of Fallacy Theory: The Standard Definition of 'Fallacy'.Hans Vilhelm Hansen - 2002 - Argumentation 16 (2):133-155.
The Burden of Proof and Its Role in Argumentation.Ulrike Hahn & Mike Oaksford - 2007 - Argumentation 21 (1):39-61.
Fallacies, Blunders, and Dialogue Shifts: Walton‘s Contributions to the Fallacy Debate.Christopher W. Tindale - 1997 - Argumentation 11 (3):341-354.