Location
University of Windsor
Document Type
Paper
Keywords
equivocation, informal fallacies, logic, translation problem, tu quoque
Start Date
22-5-2013 9:00 AM
End Date
25-5-2013 5:00 PM
Abstract
In this paper I claim that the reason we are reluctant to call many informal fallacies fallacies of relevance is because we can interpret them as providing contextual information about how the argument is to be interpreted. This interpretative dilemma is that the logical form is determined in part by whether the analyst wishes to be charitable to the proponent or the opponent. The evaluation of the argument is nonetheless purely logical.
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Response to Submission
John Casey, Commentary on: David Botting's "Interpretative dilemmas"
Reader's Reactions
John Casey, Commentary on: David Botting's "Interpretative dilemmas" (May 2013)
Included in
Interpretative dilemmas
University of Windsor
In this paper I claim that the reason we are reluctant to call many informal fallacies fallacies of relevance is because we can interpret them as providing contextual information about how the argument is to be interpreted. This interpretative dilemma is that the logical form is determined in part by whether the analyst wishes to be charitable to the proponent or the opponent. The evaluation of the argument is nonetheless purely logical.
