Evidentiary Convincing and Evidentiary Fallacies

Argumentation:1-19 (forthcoming)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

A convincing argument can change a discussant’s commitment regarding the acceptability of a claim, but the same effect can be achieved by examining evidence. Observing objects or events that count as evidence for or against the acceptability of a statement can change one’s commitment regarding that statement. If we speak of fallacies in the realm of convincing through argumentation, can we speak of fallacies in the realm of convincing through evidence? In this paper, we defend an affirmative answer. We introduce and discuss the conceptual implications of evidentiary fallacies as fallacies committed when evidence is fabricated or suppressed during an attempt to resolve disagreement using proof. We then apply the notion of evidentiary fallacy to two real-life examples of mis-executed evidentiary procedures. We conclude that the notion of evidentiary fallacy can contribute to a more comprehensive fallacy theory and can foster new and broadly applicable critical skills.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,438

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

Undermining the case for contrastivism.Ram Neta - 2008 - Social Epistemology 22 (3):289 – 304.

Analytics

Added to PP
2024-02-08

Downloads
4 (#1,608,067)

6 months
4 (#790,778)

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

Fallacies.C. L. Hamblin - 1970 - Revue Philosophique de la France Et de l'Etranger 160:492-492.

View all 11 references / Add more references