Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Informal Logic’ Category

Cogency vol. 3 no.1 Now Available

Posted in Announcements, Informal Logic, Pragma-dialectics, Rationality, Rhetoric, tagged , , , , on December 8, 2011| 2 Comments »

RAIL is happy to announce the appearance of the latest issue of the journal Cogency!  

Click on the image to the right to view the table of contents for this issue.  The articles named therein make me wish this weren’t final exam season. Among them is an article by Tony Blair on the moral normativity of argumentation, an issue by Scott Aikin on how the rhetorical model of argument is self-defeating, and a note on practical reasoning by Gilbert Harman just to name a few. All the articles aren’t available for download yet but I’m assured that they will be soon. The editorial, which is available for download at the present time, gives a brief synopsis of the articles.  (It also gives a fairly comprehensive listing of recent and ongoing conferences in argumentation theory.) Happy reading!

Read Full Post »

SEP Entry on Informal Logic Updated

Posted in Announcements, Informal Logic, tagged , , on December 3, 2011| Leave a Comment »

Just a quick announcement here to let you know that the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy Entry on Informal Logic has been updated by author Leo Groarke.  The update is a substantial one and includes a great many new resources in the links section.  Thanks are due to Leo for his work on this. Do check it out!

Read Full Post »

Informal Logic vol. 31 no. 4, on Charles Hamblin

Posted in Announcements, Informal Logic, tagged , , , , , , , on December 2, 2011| Leave a Comment »

Informal Logic vol. 31 no. 4

The latest edition of Informal Logic, dedicated to topics emerging from Charles Hamblin’s landmark 1970 work, Fallacies, is now available.  Contributing authors to this volume include Jim Mackenzie, Douglas Walton, Ralph Johnson, Fabrizio Macagno, and Jan Ablert van Laar and John Woods.It’s an interesting and welcome collection of essays with entries that range from developments of Hamblin’s ideas to criticism of the same.  In the latter category is John Woods’s highly recommended essay “Whither Consequence?”. Those interested in foundational questions of informal logic (for instance, whether informal logic is rightly called logic in the first place) will find Woods’s discussion of Hamblin’s views on induction very stimulating indeed.  It is an important discussion not just for informal logicians and argumentation theorists, but for logicians of all denominations. It easily is one of the best essays of the year.

Having had only the opportunity to peruse the other entries at this point I have to say that I’m very much looking forward to reading them too. If they are as interesting and insightful as I believe they are on the basis of what I’ve seen of them, then this issue of Informal Logic is a worthy tribute to the enduring importance of Charles Hamblin’s work and its impact on our field.

 

Read Full Post »

Name-dropping

Posted in Critical Thinking, Discussion, Informal Logic, Teaching, tagged , , , on November 22, 2011| 4 Comments »

This article from the Denver Post stresses the usefulness of philosophy, including how “emphasis on informal and symbolic logic” helps with computer science.  In accounts of philosophy curricula, unfortunately, reference to informal logic is typically just name-dropping, as the textbook authors are mostly not scholars in the field, and instructors rarely have any relevant training.  That seems to be the case here:  Colorado State has only one logician on faculty, and he specializes in formal logic.

This problem is deeply ironic, for the scholarship being neglected was developed for the very purpose of filling the gap between logical theory and logical practice. Much scholarship in symbolic logic may be irrelevant to undergraduate pedagogy, but informal logic is a movement developed substantially for the purpose of creating an approach to logic that would be more relevant to students.

When philosophers appeal to “informal logic” or philosophers claim ownership over the teaching of “critical thinking,” it verges on fraud.  The baiting with informal logic scholarship devoted to critical thinking and switching it for a loose distillation of the cultural standards in the discipline of philosophy is going to catch up with us eventually.

It’s time for philosophers to wake up and put our money, our faculty positions, our textbook buying power, and our textbook reviews where the scholarship is.  Philosophy can be highly relevant if we hold ourselves to higher scholarly standards.

Read Full Post »

Two New Books via CRRAR

Posted in Announcements, Argumentation, Informal Logic, tagged , , , , on November 17, 2011| Leave a Comment »

Today CRRAR announced the publication of two new books that should be of interest to those working in the fields of argumentation studies and informal logic. The first is a collection of papers by co-founder of the informal logic movement J. Anthony Blair.  The volume collects works spanning 30 years of research of one of the most respected scholars in the field.

Groundwork in the Theory of Argumentation, Selected Papers of J. Anthony Blair, with an Introduction by Christopher W. Tindale. Dordrecht: Springer, 2012.  Pp. xxii, 1-355.  (List price: cloth $189.00, €149,75)
[ Contents: Introduction; 23 papers by Blair; list of Blair’s publications; References; Name and Subject Indexes]

The second work announced today collects papers from the CRRAR symposium on conductive argument held in 2010.  I had the good fortune to be present at that event and I can attest firsthand that there is much of interest contained within these pages.  There were papers from a diverse  range of perspectives and approaches within argumentation theory and they covered many aspects of the topic of conductive argument.  I’m very happy to announce that this collection of papers is now available to all.

Conductive Argument, An Overlooked Type of Defeasible Reasoning Ed. by J. Anthony Blair and Ralph H. Johnson. London: College Publications, 2012. Pp. viii, 1-299. (List price: paper $20.75)
[Contents: Intro. by Blair; Papers by Derek Allen, Mark Battersby & Sharon Bailin, Maurice Finocchiaro, Thomas Fischer, James Freeman, Trudy Govier, Hans Hansen, Rongdong Jin, Ralph Johnson, Fred Kauffeld, Christian Kock, Robert Pinto, Douglas Walton, Harald Wohlrapp, Frank Zenker; References; Name and Subject Indexes]

Read Full Post »

Informal Logic vol. 31 no. 3

Posted in Announcements, Informal Logic, tagged , , , , , , , on October 6, 2011| Leave a Comment »

Miss OSSA? Here's your chance to catch up!

 

RAIL is pleased to announce the appearance of a new issue of Informal Logic.  This issue features the keynote papers and the paper that won the J. Anthony Blair prize for best student paper.  Those who followed my postings here or on Twitter during the conference will recall my mentions of Karen Tracy’s fascinating keynote address. Here’s a chance to read the paper itself. While you’re at it I also highly recommend Moldovan and Smith’s Blair Prize paper “Arguments as Abstract Objects”.  Together with Geoff Goddu’s AILACT Prize paper (highlighted in a post of its own here on RAIL not too long ago), I’d say Moldovan and Smith’s paper marks the distinct emergence (some would say re-emergence) of an interesting metaphysical sub-field in informal logic and argumentation theory. It will be interesting to see how others respond to the arguments marshaled in these two papers. At any rate, there’s no denying that the gauntlet has been thrown down!  Happy reading. 🙂

Read Full Post »

Alvin Goldman and Jennifer Lackey on Social Epistemology

Posted in Connections, Informal Logic, tagged , , , , , on September 23, 2011| 3 Comments »

In this interesting installment of the always wonderful PhilosophyTV, Alvin Goldman and Jennifer Lackey discuss the up-and-coming subfield of social epistemology.  Their discussion ranges from the history of the subfield to some of its current topics. It is worth watching for argumentation theorists–especially those based in philosophy–because it represents what amounts to a completely different way of thinking about the epistemic import of human interaction–especially disagreement–than one typically finds in argumentation theory. Whereas there might have been a time when those in the informal logic movement could have rightly claimed to be the only group of philosophers working on these sorts of issues, things have changed dramatically in the last 10 years.  This, I think, is something those of us who know, love, and believe in informal logic should consider fairly seriously. The growing philosophical consciousness of subfields like social epistemology, the logic of belief revision, and non-monotonic logics in general over the past decade or so has definite methodological implications for the work that we do.  At the very least it is a substantial change in a key subset of the audience to which we often address our claims.  Might a change in the rhetoric of informal logic be in the offing?

The video is roughly an hour and fifteen minutes long.  Enjoy!

Read Full Post »

Informal Logic vol. 31 no.2

Posted in Announcements, Discussion, Informal Logic, Pragma-dialectics, Rhetoric, tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , on July 15, 2011| Leave a Comment »

Informal Logic vol. 31 no. 2

Volume 31, number 2 of Informal Logic is now available for your reading pleasure.  Particularly recommended in this issue is Geoff Goddu’s 2010 AILACT Essay Prize-winning article on the process/product ambiguity.  I had the good fortune to see this work in an earlier phase at ISSA last summer and I’m very happy to see it in print here.  It’s a valuable article not only for it’s methodological challenge to what is for many in the study of argumentation a foundational notion, but because it spurs us to think more carefully about the metaphysics of argument in general.  The paper and its author well deserve the recognition of the AILACT prize.

Read Full Post »

Open Access to Cogency

Posted in Announcements, Argumentation, Connections, Discussion, Fallacies, Informal Logic, Pragma-dialectics, Rationality, Rhetoric, tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , on June 9, 2011| 1 Comment »

I’m pleased to announce here on RAIL that the journal Cogency has allowed open access to it’s first four issues. I’m not sure if they plan to continue this policy, as, for instance, Informal Logic does, but for now it’s a great opportunity to check out what is already a diverse and interesting array of articles by many of the leading scholars in our field. (How they let an article of mine slip into the mix is anyone’s guess!)

Do check it out!

Read Full Post »

CFP: First Issue of EID&A

Posted in Announcements, Argumentation, CFP, Connections, Discourse Analysis, Informal Logic, Rhetoric, tagged , , , , , , , on June 9, 2011| 1 Comment »

Note: This is a re-posting to remind readers that the CFP deadline is fast approaching!

This Call for Papers is for the first issue of the Electronic Journal of Integrated Studies in Discourse and Argumentation

From the EID&A home page:

Linked to the Department of Arts and Literature of Universidade Estadual de Santa Cruz, the Journal EID&A – Electronic Journal of Integrated Studies in Discourse and Argumentation – arises from a mission to contribute to the dissemination of studies located in the interface between Discourse Analysis and Argumentation. Thus, papers submitted to this Scientific Committee should be taken on the perspective of studies that comprise the argumentation in the process of constructing meaning in discourse and in the utterance situation. The goal is to promote discussion of theoretical objects or analysis of these discursive practices in society.

Call for Papers

The first issue EID&A will gather papers which focus precisely on the essence, problems and prospects from the interface between Discourse Analysis and Argumentation.

The journal EID&A – Electronic Journal of Integrated Studies in Discourse and Argumentation – invites researchers to contribute with papers focused on the discussion about the nature, problems and prospects of the interface between the Discourse Analysis and the Argumentation.

The Journal EID&A is going to publish papers, translations and reviews. For more details, authors must consult the rules for submissions of papers, available on the website www.uesc.br/revistas/eidea/english.

The deadline for submission of papers will end on July 1st, 2011. The first edition of the EID&A is awaited to September 2011.

Read the original announcement via the Analysis and Discourse wiki here.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »