On the design and function of rational arguments

Behavioral and Brain Sciences 34 (2):85-86 (2011)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

It is unclear how an argumentative environment would select for better reasoning given three general findings. First, argument rationality typically fails to persuade poor reasoners. Second, reasoned argumentation competes with more persuasive and less rational arguments for limited cognitive resources. Third, those poor at reasoning fail to distinguish between valid and invalid arguments. Reasoning, therefore, is poorly designed for argument

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,709

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

Biological function, adaptation, and natural design.Colin Allen & Marc Bekoff - 1995 - Philosophy of Science 62 (4):609-622.
Argumentation as Rational Persuasion.J. Anthony Blair - 2012 - Argumentation 26 (1):71-81.
Learning to design systems.Gary Metcalf - 2003 - World Futures 59 (1):21 – 36.
Hume and the argument for biological design.Graham Oppy - 1996 - Biology and Philosophy 11 (4):519-534.
Integrating research and development: the emergence of rational drug design in the pharmaceutical industry.Matthias Adam - 2005 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 36 (3):513-537.

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-10-27

Downloads
22 (#706,230)

6 months
3 (#965,065)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations