The language and diagramming of rejection and objection

Abstract

Understanding the language of rejections and objections is an important part of the analysis and practice of argument. In order to strengthen this understanding, we might turn to diagramming, as it has been shown to have the virtue of improving critical thinking skills. This paper discusses what reliable meaning can be taken from words and phrases related to rejections and objections, and then how to diagram them.

Categories

Add categories

Keywords

Reprint years

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,219

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.

My notes

Similar books and articles

Commentary on: Cathal Woods' "The language and diagramming of rejection and objection".Jan Albert van Laar - unknown
Diagramming Objections To Independent Premises.Cathal Woods - 2011 - Informal Logic 31 (2):139-151.
Enhancing the Diagramming Method in Informal Logic.Dale Jacquette - 2011 - Argument: Biannual Philosophical Journal 1 (2):327-360.
Assessing the Efficacy of Argument Diagramming to Teach Critical Thinking Skills in Introduction to Philosophy.Maralee Harrell - 2012 - Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines 27 (2):31-39.
Araucaria as a Tool for Diagramming Arguments in Teaching and Studying Philosophy .F. Macagno, D. Walton, G. Rowe & C. Reed - 2006 - Teaching Philosophy 29 (2):111-124,.
Turing’s Responses to Two Objections.Darren Abramson - 2008 - Minds and Machines 18 (2):147-167.
Dialectics in Everyday Life.Ora Gruengard - 2008 - Proceedings of the Xxii World Congress of Philosophy 4:59-66.
Using Argument Diagramming Software in the Classroom.Maralee Harrell - 2005 - Teaching Philosophy 28 (2):163-177.
Inferentialism and the compositionality of meaning.Jaroslav Peregrin - unknown
Argument Diagramming and Critical Thinking in Introductory Philosophy.Maralee Harrell - 2011 - Higher Education Research and Development 30 (3):371-385.
Two dogmas of deontology: Aggregation, rights, and the separateness of persons: Alastair Norcross.Alastair Norcross - 2009 - Social Philosophy and Policy 26 (1):76-95.
Dialectical Relevance in Persuasion Dialogue.Douglas Walton - 1999 - Informal Logic 19 (2).
Three Aspects of the Nature of Linguistic Meaning.Robert Kermode - 1996 - Dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
A user’s guide to the evolutionary argument against naturalism.Omar Mirza - 2008 - Philosophical Studies 141 (2):125 - 146.
An object model for use in oral and written advocacy.Charles Unwin - 2008 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 16 (4):389-402.

Analytics

Added to PP
2015-04-02

Downloads
22 (#669,532)

6 months
3 (#902,269)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Cathal Robert Woods
Virginia Wesleyan University

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Fundamentals of Critical Argumentation.Douglas N. Walton - 2005 - New York: Cambridge University Press.
Argument maps improve critical thinking.Charles Twardy - 2004 - Teaching Philosophy 27 (2):95--116.
The Ways of Criticism.Erik C. W. Krabbe & Jan Albert van Laar - 2011 - Argumentation 25 (2):199-227.
Defeasible reasoning and degrees of justification.John L. Pollock † - 2010 - Argument and Computation 1 (1):7-22.

View all 10 references / Add more references