Document Type
Paper
Start Date
15-5-1999 9:00 AM
End Date
17-5-1999 5:00 PM
Abstract
Argumentation theorists typically conceive argument goodness in terms of an argument's provision of reasons for its conclusion which are such that fair-minded appraisal suggests that it ought to be accepted by all who so appraise it. This conception o f argument quality makes no reference to either the persons appraising the argument, or the context of the appraisal. Much recent work rejects such an abstract, impersonal notion of argument goodness, with some theorists emphasizing the importance of cul tural difference in argument appraisal. While there is much merit in this perspective, the multiculturalist argument against impersonal, acontextualist conceptions of argument quality fails.
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Response to Submission
J Anthony Blair, Commentary on Siegel
Reader's Reactions
J Anthony Blair, Commentary on Siegel (May 1999)
Included in
Argument Quality and Cultural Difference
Argumentation theorists typically conceive argument goodness in terms of an argument's provision of reasons for its conclusion which are such that fair-minded appraisal suggests that it ought to be accepted by all who so appraise it. This conception o f argument quality makes no reference to either the persons appraising the argument, or the context of the appraisal. Much recent work rejects such an abstract, impersonal notion of argument goodness, with some theorists emphasizing the importance of cul tural difference in argument appraisal. While there is much merit in this perspective, the multiculturalist argument against impersonal, acontextualist conceptions of argument quality fails.
