The argumentative theory of reasoning applies to scientists and philosophers, too

Behavioral and Brain Sciences 34 (2):81-82 (2011)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Logical consistency demands that Mercier and Sperber's (M&S's) argumentative theory of reasoning apply to their own reasoning in the target article. Although they hint that their argument applies to professional reasoners such as scientists and philosophers, they do not develop this idea. In this commentary, I discuss the applicability of argumentative theory to science and philosophy, emphasizing the perils of moral reasoning

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,503

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

Why do humans reason? Arguments for an argumentative theory.Dan Sperber - 2011 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 34 (2):57.
The Social Origins of Folk Epistemology.Hugo Mercier - 2010 - Review of Philosophy and Psychology 1 (4):499-514.
The Practice of Argumentative Discussion.David Hitchcock - 2002 - Argumentation 16 (3):287-298.
Brain, mind, man, and society: Naturalism with a human face.Daniel Andler - 2006 - In D. Andler, M. Okada & I. Watanabe (eds.), Reasoning and Cognition. pp. 77--84.
Reason and argument.Peter Thomas Geach - 1976 - Oxford: Blackwell.
What good is moral reasoning?Hugo Mercier - 2011 - Mind and Society 10 (2):131-148.

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-10-27

Downloads
47 (#335,773)

6 months
4 (#779,417)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations