In recent times, there have been different attempts to make an interesting use of the concept of script (as inherited from the fields of psychology and cognitive sciences) within argumentation theory. Although, in many cases, what we find under this label are computerized routines mainly used in e-learning collaborative proceses involving argumentation, either as an educational means or an educational goal, there are also other studies in which the concept of script plays a more theoretical role as the kind of (...) commonly human cognitive structure that could account for the way in which argumentation might develop in ordinary language and ordinary settings. We aim at exploring these latter possibilities, differentiating between the global ascription of the script concept to argumentation practices as procedural and regulated actions from the somewhat more suggestive association between socially shared scripts (expected narratives, plausible sequences, customary experiences, etc.) and the way some enthymemes work from an interactive, rhetorical perspective. The concept of script could help us understand some more procedural than propositional aspects of the cognitive sets shared by arguer and audience and account for the communicative success of apparently defective argumentation. (shrink)

Let’s agree in calling “classical demonstration” a deduction that enables us to know the rational necessity that something is the case and cannot be otherwise. I propose to take seriously actual instances of this notion, e.g. some mathematical proofs, and explore certain discoursive and epistemic implications of their existence. Then I will look at questions about characterizing, rigorizing and acknowledging this kind of conclusive proof. Finally, some remarks on the meaning of Provability Logic in this context will be made.

The main aims of this paper are two: first, to show that the current situation of History of Logic is far from being satisfactory, and second, to put forward a programme for its improvement. To this end it is as well, I think, to take into account a new conceptual and historiographical approach to growth of Iogic as a discipline, some basic notions in this regard -e.g., the notion of being a contribution to develop ment of Iogic-, and some others (...) compIementary aspects, commonly neglected by the History of Logic scholars. (shrink)

Giving Reasons pretende ofrecer una aproximación no solo precisa, sino comprensiva, a una teoría sistemática de la argumentación. A la luz de una distinción de Vaz Ferreira entre «pensar por sistemas» y «pensar por ideas a tener en cuenta», me gustaría hacer unas observaciones para complementar y, digamos, �abrir� la incipiente clausura teórica del sistema lingüístico-pragmático de Giving Reasons. Voy a considerar dos casos en particular: el tratamiento del concepto mismo de argumentación y la conversión del principio de cooperación y (...) las máximas de Grice en una especie de marco sistemático donde cabe encajar y acomodar el estudio de las falacias. (shrink)

The text attempts to look upon globalization in the education as a problem, referring to the governmental strategy that guaranties the control and the social development beginning from a modernization project that is not determined. Therefore, when taking into account as a frame of reference the centuries XIX and XX, it is shown the ‘education role’ as a control mechanism in permanent relation with the public politics and it is questioned its apparent liberal character.

En este artículo me propongo dos tareas. (1) Mostrar la singularidad de los paralogismos según Vaz Ferreira dentro de la tradición de las falacias, debida no sólo a su peculiar marco �psico-lógico� de planteamiento, sino a su concepción del paralogismo como un proceso o estado de confusión y una fuente de errores mentales y cognitivos antes que discursivos. (2) Trasladar esta idea al campo actual de la argumentación para aprovechar su poder de sugerencia, pues la contribución de Vaz Ferreira no (...) se limita a la lúcida exploración e ilustración del paralogismo como una dimensión del discurrir falaz, antes de él apenas entrevista. Además abunda en propuestas dignas de tenerse en cuenta en nuestras discusiones actuales en torno a la argumentación falaz. (shrink)