Author ORCID Identifier
0000-0003-4522-5898
Location
Room 1
Document Type
Paper
Keywords
Argumentation, Conclusion, Definition, Dialogue, Evidence, Premises, Reconstruction, Speech act, Taste
Start Date
5-6-2020 9:00 AM
End Date
5-6-2020 10:00 AM
Abstract
This paper is intended to answer the question of whether taste represents some kind of evidence in argumentation. To do this, the text is divided into four parts: first, the relationship between the technique of reconstruction and the definitions of argumentation is exposed. Second, different borderline cases that limit the use of this technique are discussed. Third, a dialogue where the argument appeals to taste is presented as another borderline case. Fourth, the role of taste as evidence (ground) for the analyzed argument is explored.
Previous Versions
Reader's Reactions
Gabrijela Kisicek, Commentary on Daniel Mejia Saldarraiaga: „Does taste counts as evidence in argumentation?” (June 2020)
Included in
Does taste counts as evidence in argumentation?
Room 1
This paper is intended to answer the question of whether taste represents some kind of evidence in argumentation. To do this, the text is divided into four parts: first, the relationship between the technique of reconstruction and the definitions of argumentation is exposed. Second, different borderline cases that limit the use of this technique are discussed. Third, a dialogue where the argument appeals to taste is presented as another borderline case. Fourth, the role of taste as evidence (ground) for the analyzed argument is explored.
