Location

University of Windsor

Document Type

Paper

Start Date

3-6-2009 9:00 AM

End Date

6-6-2009 5:00 PM

Abstract

The paper sheds light on an important procedural debate in the U.S. House of Representatives on the American Federal Bill of Rights in the summer of 1789. To study the debate, it is proposed that it is useful to draw on the informal fallacy of ad socordiam, and an illustration is provided, with attention paid to the question of how to identify and analyze the fallacy.

Creative Commons License

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

Response to Submission

Henrike Jansen, Commentary on Rudanko

Reader's Reactions

Henrike Jansen, Commentary on Rudanko (June 2009)

Included in

Philosophy Commons

Share

COinS
 
Jun 3rd, 9:00 AM Jun 6th, 5:00 PM

Reinstating and Defining Ad Socordiam as an Informal Fallacy: A case study from a political debate in the early American republic

University of Windsor

The paper sheds light on an important procedural debate in the U.S. House of Representatives on the American Federal Bill of Rights in the summer of 1789. To study the debate, it is proposed that it is useful to draw on the informal fallacy of ad socordiam, and an illustration is provided, with attention paid to the question of how to identify and analyze the fallacy.