To understand what a fallacy is one needs to understand what a bad argument is and what it is for an argument to appear good. I will argue that from an intuitive standpoint a good argument should be understood in roughly the way Richard Feldman has proposed, that is, as an argument that gives people reason to believe its conclusion. However, I will also argue that an externalist condition that requires that the premises really do support the conclusion must be added to the internalist account which only requires that a person be justified in believing the premises support the conclusion
(1) The aim of the paper is to develop a reduction of fallacy theory, i.e. to "deduce" fallacy theor...
Abstract. What should a virtue theory of argumentation say about fallacious reasoning? If good argum...
The debate between internalism and externalism in epistemology concerns one of the traditional condi...
This paper argues that recent theoretical attempts to understand fallacious reasoning fail because t...
Shouldn\u27t we be convinced by good (valid) arguments and not by bad ones? But there are valid argu...
If good argument is virtuous, then fallacies are vicious. Yet fallacies cannot just be identified wi...
Within the epistemological approach to Argumentation Theory, there are two opposing views on what a ...
One result of successful argumentation – able arguers presenting cogent arguments to competent audie...
What makes the difference between good and bad reasoning? In this paper we defend a novel account of...
What makes the difference between good and bad reasoning? In this paper we defend a novel account of...
If we think of fallacies as violations of the preconditions governing the products, processes, and p...
In this paper I claim that the reason we are reluctant to call many informal fallacies fallacies of ...
This paper offers a solution to the problem of understanding how a fallacious argument can be decept...
This article investigates what constitutes good reason, in particular in scientific communication. I...
In a 2006 paper I claimed that the virtue arguments or inferences must have is not that they be trut...
(1) The aim of the paper is to develop a reduction of fallacy theory, i.e. to "deduce" fallacy theor...
Abstract. What should a virtue theory of argumentation say about fallacious reasoning? If good argum...
The debate between internalism and externalism in epistemology concerns one of the traditional condi...
This paper argues that recent theoretical attempts to understand fallacious reasoning fail because t...
Shouldn\u27t we be convinced by good (valid) arguments and not by bad ones? But there are valid argu...
If good argument is virtuous, then fallacies are vicious. Yet fallacies cannot just be identified wi...
Within the epistemological approach to Argumentation Theory, there are two opposing views on what a ...
One result of successful argumentation – able arguers presenting cogent arguments to competent audie...
What makes the difference between good and bad reasoning? In this paper we defend a novel account of...
What makes the difference between good and bad reasoning? In this paper we defend a novel account of...
If we think of fallacies as violations of the preconditions governing the products, processes, and p...
In this paper I claim that the reason we are reluctant to call many informal fallacies fallacies of ...
This paper offers a solution to the problem of understanding how a fallacious argument can be decept...
This article investigates what constitutes good reason, in particular in scientific communication. I...
In a 2006 paper I claimed that the virtue arguments or inferences must have is not that they be trut...
(1) The aim of the paper is to develop a reduction of fallacy theory, i.e. to "deduce" fallacy theor...
Abstract. What should a virtue theory of argumentation say about fallacious reasoning? If good argum...
The debate between internalism and externalism in epistemology concerns one of the traditional condi...