標(biāo)題: Titlebook: ; [打印本頁] 作者: 烹飪 時(shí)間: 2025-3-21 17:13
書目名稱Groundwork in the Theory of Argumentation影響因子(影響力)
書目名稱Groundwork in the Theory of Argumentation影響因子(影響力)學(xué)科排名
書目名稱Groundwork in the Theory of Argumentation網(wǎng)絡(luò)公開度
書目名稱Groundwork in the Theory of Argumentation網(wǎng)絡(luò)公開度學(xué)科排名
書目名稱Groundwork in the Theory of Argumentation被引頻次
書目名稱Groundwork in the Theory of Argumentation被引頻次學(xué)科排名
書目名稱Groundwork in the Theory of Argumentation年度引用
書目名稱Groundwork in the Theory of Argumentation年度引用學(xué)科排名
書目名稱Groundwork in the Theory of Argumentation讀者反饋
書目名稱Groundwork in the Theory of Argumentation讀者反饋學(xué)科排名
作者: 萬神殿 時(shí)間: 2025-3-21 23:02 作者: ZEST 時(shí)間: 2025-3-22 03:00
Premise Adequacyment, there will then be many different kinds of “good argument.” The classic philosophical notion that truth is a sufficient condition of premise adequacy for all argumentation does not stand up to the test of these different contexts of evaluation.作者: 相信 時(shí)間: 2025-3-22 05:18
Walton’s Argumentation Schemes for Presumptive Reasoning: A Critique and Development abstraction” problems needs to be addressed. Last, I propose ways of filling in some of the missing pieces. Although I think Walton’s 1966 account is incomplete, and I disagree with some details, I believe it is important, and on the right track.作者: Thrombolysis 時(shí)間: 2025-3-22 12:41
Mark J. Bliton,Stuart G. Finderering evidence supporting his interpretations, but without seeking out and considering evidence against them, except to discredit it. It is argued that students need to learn how to think critically about history in the specific ways needed to recognize, understand and avoid the flaws of Keegstra’s approach.作者: 使絕緣 時(shí)間: 2025-3-22 13:25
,Diskussion verschiedener Erfolgsma?st?be, or the trustworthiness of one’s own experience can be and have been formulated. Thorough arguments will have a dialectical dimension as well, with objections to the thesis or to the arguments for it acknowledged and answers to them provided.作者: 使絕緣 時(shí)間: 2025-3-22 17:36 作者: 允許 時(shí)間: 2025-3-22 22:26
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-01072-0ses of arguments, or else (or as well), a confusion of modes or models of arguments with perspectives on argument. The conception of argument proposed is in an important respect pluralistic, and is hostile to the attempt to reduce the variety of models or uses of arguments to any single one.作者: duplicate 時(shí)間: 2025-3-23 04:29
Bharata’s Performative Teleosis a complete account of their logical norms. I sketch one way of framing their norms within the Toulmin model that assimilates a lot of the recent work of various theorists. And I join those who insist that assessing the logic of an argument is not all there is to evaluating arguments.作者: Cuisine 時(shí)間: 2025-3-23 06:47
The Keegstra Affair: A Test Case for Critical Thinkingering evidence supporting his interpretations, but without seeking out and considering evidence against them, except to discredit it. It is argued that students need to learn how to think critically about history in the specific ways needed to recognize, understand and avoid the flaws of Keegstra’s approach.作者: Pert敏捷 時(shí)間: 2025-3-23 11:10
Relevance, Acceptability and Sufficiency Today or the trustworthiness of one’s own experience can be and have been formulated. Thorough arguments will have a dialectical dimension as well, with objections to the thesis or to the arguments for it acknowledged and answers to them provided.作者: 清唱?jiǎng)?nbsp; 時(shí)間: 2025-3-23 16:02
The “Logic” of Informal Logicd argument and to argue for its bona fides. The proposition that such reasoning and arguments are legitimate, one of the founding hypotheses of the informal logic movement, seems to have found fairly widespread confirmation.作者: 愛花花兒憤怒 時(shí)間: 2025-3-23 19:25
Towards a Philosophy of Argumentses of arguments, or else (or as well), a confusion of modes or models of arguments with perspectives on argument. The conception of argument proposed is in an important respect pluralistic, and is hostile to the attempt to reduce the variety of models or uses of arguments to any single one.作者: Anticoagulants 時(shí)間: 2025-3-23 23:41 作者: Baffle 時(shí)間: 2025-3-24 04:25
Performance-Measurement-Systemeshould also be in touch with actual usage. The chapter first describes . as one way of understanding informal logic. There follows an account of the logical heart of argumentation, which identifies another way of understanding informal logic. Then critical thinking is related to those possible mappings of informal logic.作者: 軟膏 時(shí)間: 2025-3-24 08:37
Argument Management, Informal Logic and Critical Thinkingshould also be in touch with actual usage. The chapter first describes . as one way of understanding informal logic. There follows an account of the logical heart of argumentation, which identifies another way of understanding informal logic. Then critical thinking is related to those possible mappings of informal logic.作者: brachial-plexus 時(shí)間: 2025-3-24 11:26 作者: ethereal 時(shí)間: 2025-3-24 17:18 作者: LUDE 時(shí)間: 2025-3-24 20:36 作者: Cupidity 時(shí)間: 2025-3-25 02:18 作者: 糾纏,纏繞 時(shí)間: 2025-3-25 04:02
What Is the Right Amount of Support for a Conclusion?osition, .?” Two answers, deductivism and the Pragma-Dialectical theory, are considered and rejected. It is argued that an argument’s support for its conclusion will be sufficient when it meets its burdens of proof, relying in the final analysis on what may be presumed or accepted without further qu作者: 無法解釋 時(shí)間: 2025-3-25 09:54 作者: 大酒杯 時(shí)間: 2025-3-25 13:49 作者: textile 時(shí)間: 2025-3-25 19:49 作者: Postmenopause 時(shí)間: 2025-3-25 23:42
The “Logic” of Informal Logicnd induction. I briefly describe and characterize six accounts that seem on the face of it to portray some third type of assessment of an illative move, independent of deductive validity and of inductive strength: those of Wisdom, Toulmin, Wellman, Rescher, defeasible reasoning theorists such as Pol作者: 克制 時(shí)間: 2025-3-26 04:07 作者: mechanical 時(shí)間: 2025-3-26 08:05
Walton’s Argumentation Schemes for Presumptive Reasoning: A Critique and Developmentof what is missing from the account as presented by Walton. I argue that the relation between argumentation and reasoning as it relates to schemes needs to be explained; the problems of classification of schemes within broad types needs to be addressed; a distinction is needed between descriptive an作者: RAG 時(shí)間: 2025-3-26 10:10 作者: 帶來墨水 時(shí)間: 2025-3-26 13:50
Towards a Philosophy of Argumentments being put to a wide range of uses and that frees the definition of argument from association with any particular use. The goal is to construct a framework in terms of which various particular theories of argument can be seen to have their place, and the various controversies in the field of ar作者: ANT 時(shí)間: 2025-3-26 20:11 作者: Exploit 時(shí)間: 2025-3-26 23:11 作者: 扔掉掐死你 時(shí)間: 2025-3-27 01:52
Mark J. Bliton,Stuart G. Finderes. James Keegstra was a high school history teacher in Alberta, Canada, who taught his students that there is a Jewish conspiracy to rule the world and that the Holocaust did not occur. His teaching is analyzed in terms of three of its salient features: his theory of history, his historical methodo作者: 側(cè)面左右 時(shí)間: 2025-3-27 08:17 作者: 多節(jié) 時(shí)間: 2025-3-27 13:08 作者: 換話題 時(shí)間: 2025-3-27 17:01
Zusammenspiel von System und Mensch,osition, .?” Two answers, deductivism and the Pragma-Dialectical theory, are considered and rejected. It is argued that an argument’s support for its conclusion will be sufficient when it meets its burdens of proof, relying in the final analysis on what may be presumed or accepted without further qu作者: choleretic 時(shí)間: 2025-3-27 17:57
Vorgehensweise und Operationalisierung,mmunicative implications this connection implies; but premises must not only be formulated to communicate support, they must also actually lend support, and their relevance is a function of their doing so. Explicating premissary relevance is thus a matter of explicating the idea of a premise’s lendi作者: 下邊深陷 時(shí)間: 2025-3-28 00:59
Performancemessung im Hochschulbereichion will take for granted, stipulate the senses I give to some of the terms of art which, although common, have different meanings in the hands of different authors, and explain what I mean by “premise adequacy.” A review of the various contexts for evaluating arguments shows that the question about作者: 冰河期 時(shí)間: 2025-3-28 03:55 作者: 使無效 時(shí)間: 2025-3-28 07:34
Performancemessung von Lebenszyklusfonds,nd induction. I briefly describe and characterize six accounts that seem on the face of it to portray some third type of assessment of an illative move, independent of deductive validity and of inductive strength: those of Wisdom, Toulmin, Wellman, Rescher, defeasible reasoning theorists such as Pol作者: 羊欄 時(shí)間: 2025-3-28 13:29 作者: 彎曲道理 時(shí)間: 2025-3-28 16:39 作者: 賭博 時(shí)間: 2025-3-28 22:10 作者: CLAM 時(shí)間: 2025-3-28 23:09 作者: 巡回 時(shí)間: 2025-3-29 05:44 作者: enmesh 時(shí)間: 2025-3-29 09:52
Groundwork in the Theory of Argumentation978-94-007-2363-4Series ISSN 1566-7650 Series E-ISSN 2215-1907 作者: JEER 時(shí)間: 2025-3-29 15:20
Is There an Obligation to Reason Well?t reasoning well is a necessary means to these ends. The second is that reasoning well is constitutive of the social good of an open, democratic society and of the personal good of the growth of the mind.作者: heterogeneous 時(shí)間: 2025-3-29 17:13 作者: ovation 時(shí)間: 2025-3-29 21:17
What Is the Right Amount of Support for a Conclusion?their ranks and also the qualifications for elevation up the rungs in their internal hierarchies. The hierarchies of authority prescribe, among other things, the standards of evidentiary sufficiency expected of arguments in the field.作者: 是突襲 時(shí)間: 2025-3-29 23:55
Premissary Relevanceed. A task that remains is to classify inference warrants and their associated conditionals by type, and draw up the general conditions that their justification needs to satisfy. It may be that parallel scholarship studying the Aristotelian doctrine of . or argument schemes will contribute to this t作者: epicondylitis 時(shí)間: 2025-3-30 07:43 作者: Classify 時(shí)間: 2025-3-30 11:01
