Location

University of Windsor

Document Type

Paper

Start Date

6-6-2007 9:00 AM

End Date

9-6-2007 5:00 PM

Abstract

In the context of a study of meta-arguments in general, and famous meta-arguments in particular, I reconstruct chapter 1 of Mill’s Subjection of Women as the meta-argument: women’s liberation should be argued on its merits (supporting it with reasons and defending it from objections) because the universality of subjection derives from the law of force (which is logically and morally questionable) and hence provides no presumption favoring its correctness. The raises the problem of the relationship among illative, dialectical, and meta-argumentative tiers

Creative Commons License

Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Response to Submission

Daniel H. Cohen, Commentary on Finocchiaro

Reader's Reactions

Daniel H. Cohen, Commentary on Finocchiaro (June 2007)

Included in

Philosophy Commons

Share

COinS
 
Jun 6th, 9:00 AM Jun 9th, 5:00 PM

Famous Meta-Arguments: Part I, Mill and the Tripartite Nature of Argumentation

University of Windsor

In the context of a study of meta-arguments in general, and famous meta-arguments in particular, I reconstruct chapter 1 of Mill’s Subjection of Women as the meta-argument: women’s liberation should be argued on its merits (supporting it with reasons and defending it from objections) because the universality of subjection derives from the law of force (which is logically and morally questionable) and hence provides no presumption favoring its correctness. The raises the problem of the relationship among illative, dialectical, and meta-argumentative tiers