This article reviews Christopher
W. Tindale’s The Philosophy
of Argument and Audience Reception
(Cambridge, 2015).
W. Tindale’s The Philosophy
of Argument and Audience Reception
(Cambridge, 2015).
Research Interests:
Copyright©PAULA_OLMOS Se permite el uso, copia y distribución de este artículo si se hace de manera literal y completa (incluidas las referencias a la Revista Iberoamericana de Argumentación), sin fines comerciales y se respeta al autor... more
Copyright©PAULA_OLMOS Se permite el uso, copia y distribución de este artículo si se hace de manera literal y completa (incluidas las referencias a la Revista Iberoamericana de Argumentación), sin fines comerciales y se respeta al autor adjuntando esta nota. El texto completo de esta licencia está disponible en: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/es/legalcode.es Revista Digital de Acceso Abierto
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests: Philosophy and Gödel
Research Interests: Philosophy and Humanities
This paper tries to offer a descriptive account of the normative workings of evaluative fallacy charges directed to narratives. In order to do that, I first defend the continuity and mutual dependence, as based on a dynamical conception... more
This paper tries to offer a descriptive account of the normative workings of evaluative fallacy charges directed to narratives. In order to do that, I first defend the continuity and mutual dependence, as based on a dynamical conception of argument, between the ‘belief conception’ and the ‘argumentative conception’ of fallacy. Then, I construe a catalogue of ‘fallacy charges’ based on both such a continuity and the variety of counterarguments explored by the theoretical framework of Argument Dialectics. And finally, I apply these ideas and distinctions in the analysis of four examples of published texts in which the charge of ‘fallacious narrative’ is issued by a discursive agent against other discursive agents’ either full-fledged narratives or narrative assumptions. The analyses confirm some of the characteristics mentioned in the catalogue as well as the argumentative nature of fallacy charges, even when the censored discourse does not exactly or explicitly contain an argument. T...
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
L'illustre latinista Concetto Marchesi si dedic\uf2, negli anni della formazione, allo studio dell'Aristotele latino, in particolare per quanto riguarda il testo dell'Etica Nicomachea e i suoi volgarizzamenti in italiano.... more
L'illustre latinista Concetto Marchesi si dedic\uf2, negli anni della formazione, allo studio dell'Aristotele latino, in particolare per quanto riguarda il testo dell'Etica Nicomachea e i suoi volgarizzamenti in italiano. Viene ricostruita, in chiave di storia della filologia, questa fase della sua formazione e dei suoi studi
Research Interests:
Commentary on Jarmila Bubikova-Moan’s “Unpacking the narrative-argumentative conundrum: story credibility revisited
Research Interests:
This paper is an essay on metaphilosophy that reviews, describes, categorises, and discusses different ways philosophers have approached the justification of abduction as a mode of reasoning and arguing. Advocating an argumentative... more
This paper is an essay on metaphilosophy that reviews, describes, categorises, and discusses different ways philosophers have approached the justification of abduction as a mode of reasoning and arguing. Advocating an argumentative approach to abduction, I model the philosophical debate over its justification as the critical assessment of a warrant-establishing argument allowing “H explains D” to be used as a reason for “H can be inferred from D.” Philosophers have discussed the conditions under which such kind of generic argument can be accepted, and I identify five kinds of such conditions, namely: a) dialectical/procedural restriction; b) claim restriction; c) restriction over acceptable explanatory principles; d) balancing restriction; and e) epistemic restriction.
Research Interests:
ABSTRACT: Contrary to current individualistic epistemology, classical rhetoric provides us with a pragmatical conception of ‘testimony ’ as a source provided to the orator by the particular community in which he acts. In order to count as... more
ABSTRACT: Contrary to current individualistic epistemology, classical rhetoric provides us with a pragmatical conception of ‘testimony ’ as a source provided to the orator by the particular community in which he acts. In order to count as usable ‘testimony’, any linguistic instance must comply with specific rules of social sanction. A deliberate attention to the social practices in which ‘testimony ’ is given and assessed may provide us with a more accurate view of its epistemological role.
Research Interests:
Abstract: Contrary to current individualistic epistemology, Classical rhetoric provides us with a pragmatical and particularly dynamic conception of ‘testimony ’ as a source made available for the orator by the particular community in... more
Abstract: Contrary to current individualistic epistemology, Classical rhetoric provides us with a pragmatical and particularly dynamic conception of ‘testimony ’ as a source made available for the orator by the particular community in which she acts. In order to count as usable testimony, a testimony to which one could appeal in further communications, any discourse must comply with specific rules of social sanction. A deliberate attention to the social practices in which testimony is given and assessed may offer us a more accurate view of its epistemological role. Résumé: Contrairement à l’épistémologie individualiste courante, la rhétorique classique nous apporte une conception pragmatique et particulièrement dynamique du « témoignage » : c’est une source rendue disponible à l’orateur par sa communauté. Un témoignage légitime auquel nous pouvons faire appel dans nos entretiens doit se conformer à des règles spécifiques de sanction sociale. Une attention délibérée sur les pratiques...
Research Interests:
The problems of deep disagreements, in- compatibility and incommensurability between political proposals in a society that favors value-diversity and value-plurality, have led some authors to assume that de- liberative processes may only... more
The problems of deep disagreements, in- compatibility and incommensurability between political proposals in a society that favors value-diversity and value-plurality, have led some authors to assume that de- liberative processes may only be conducted in terms of an instrumental, means-ends rationality. However M. Finoc- chiaro has recently suggested that meta-argumentation may be an efficient instrument "for rationally resolving deep disagreements and fierce standoffs". It is quite evi - dent that we can consider as meta-argumentative some discursive models offering an evaluative weighing of dif- ferent arguments. Precisely in the section of his Rhetoric specifically dedicated to the deliberative genre ( genos symbouleutikon) Aristotle shows his full consciousness about the relevance of this type of discursive model. Book I, chapters 4-7 explain among other things how common it is to meta-argue in deliberations over proposals of col- lective action, weighing reasons in ord...
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests: Philosophy and Artefactos
Research Interests:
Seleccion comparativa de textos pertenecientes a las dos primeras traducciones conocidas de la Retorica de Aristoteles en lengua castellana, ambas ineditas y contenidas en sendos manuscritos del s. XVII. Version 1 (1621): Mss. Hamilton 47... more
Seleccion comparativa de textos pertenecientes a las dos primeras traducciones conocidas de la Retorica de Aristoteles en lengua castellana, ambas ineditas y contenidas en sendos manuscritos del s. XVII. Version 1 (1621): Mss. Hamilton 47 de la Biblioteca de la Universidad de Glasgow, la traduccion se atribuye, de manera muy dudosa, a Pedro Simon Abril. Version 2 (1630): Mss 9809 de la Biblioteca Nacional de Espana, autografo del traductor Vicente Mariner d’Alago.
Research Interests:
Textos que recogen la preceptiva desarrollada por la retorica latina antigua en torno a las caracteristicas argumentativas y persuasivas del discurso narrativo por oposicion al explicitamente argumentativo. Textos de Ciceron (s.I a.n.e.),... more
Textos que recogen la preceptiva desarrollada por la retorica latina antigua en torno a las caracteristicas argumentativas y persuasivas del discurso narrativo por oposicion al explicitamente argumentativo. Textos de Ciceron (s.I a.n.e.), Quitiliano (s.I n.e), Julio Severiano (s.II n.e.), Fortunaciano, Mario Victorino, Cayo Julio Victor, Sulpicio Victor (s. IV n.e.) y Marciano Capella (s. V n.e.)
Research Interests:
Contrary to current individualistic epistemology, Classical rhetoric provides us with a pragmatical and particularly dynamic conception of ‘testimony’ as a source made available for the orator by the particular community in which she... more
Contrary to current individualistic epistemology, Classical rhetoric provides us with a pragmatical and particularly dynamic conception of ‘testimony’ as a source made available for the orator by the particular community in which she acts. In order to count as usable testimony, a testimony to which one could appeal in further communications, any discourse must comply with specific rules of social sanction. A deliberate attention to the social practices in which testimony is given and assessed may offer us a more accurate view of its epistemological role. Résumé: Contrairement à l’épistémologie individualiste courante, la rhétorique classique nous apporte une conception pragmatique et particulièrement dynamique du « témoignage » : c’est une source rendue disponible à l’orateur par sa communauté. Un témoignage légitime auquel nous pouvons faire appel dans nos entretiens doit se conformer à des règles spécifiques de sanction sociale. Une attention délibérée sur les pratiques sociales d...
Research Interests:
The problems of deep disagreements, incompatibility and incommensurability between political proposals in a society that favors value-diversity and value-plurality, have led some authors to assume that deliberative processes may only be... more
The problems of deep disagreements, incompatibility and incommensurability between political proposals in a society that favors value-diversity and value-plurality, have led some authors to assume that deliberative processes may only be conducted in terms of an instrumental, means-ends rationality. However M. Finocchiaro has recently suggested that meta-argumentation may be an efficient instrument "for rationally resolving deep disagreements and fierce standoffs". It is quite evident that we can consider as meta-argumentative some discursive models offering an evaluative weighing of different arguments. Precisely in the section of his Rhetoric specifically dedicated to the deliberative genre (genos symbouleutikon) Aristotle shows his full consciousness about the relevance of this type of discursive model. Book I, chapters 4-7 explain among other things how common it is to meta-argue in deliberations over proposals of collective action, weighing reasons in order to select ...
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
J.R. Morris’s paper is intended as a philosophical reflection on how to possibly address in a most appropriate and favourable way the issue of acknowledging and assessing the argumentative characteristics of narrative discourse. It does... more
J.R. Morris’s paper is intended as a philosophical reflection on how to possibly address in a most appropriate and favourable way the issue of acknowledging and assessing the argumentative characteristics of narrative discourse. It does not get to the point of providing a personal theoretical account of narrative argument as such or how it actually works nor is it its intention. It tackles instead certain preliminary problems and explicit caveats regarding the interest for argumentation theorists to involve in such a kind of research. As I am now deeply interested in this issue, as my own paper in this conference (unambiguously entitled “Narration as argument”) indicates, I have found Morris’s work especially appealing. It has also helped me to take a look at certain problems of the theoretical framework in which we may be able to think about narrative argumentation which I had myself somewhat overlooked. I must finally admit that I openly sympathize with his “use-based” approach an...
Proponiendo una relectura de uno de los periodos menos visitados y tradicionalmente apreciados de la historia de la logica y la metodologia disciplinar, un periodo, por otra parte de gran complejidad y eclecticismo, por situarse entre la... more
Proponiendo una relectura de uno de los periodos menos visitados y tradicionalmente apreciados de la historia de la logica y la metodologia disciplinar, un periodo, por otra parte de gran complejidad y eclecticismo, por situarse entre la sintesis medieval y escolastica, que habia entrado en profunda crisis respecto de los anhelos sociales y educativos de las clases emergentes europeas y la revolucion en las ciencias provocada por las nuevas miradas experimentalistas que darian a la investigacion a partir del siglo XVII?, la tesis toma como punto de partida la obra metodologia y las reflexiones en torno a la argumentacion y la justificacion y transmision del saber de un autor espanol correspondiente al humanismo del ultimo tercio del siglo XVI, Pedro Simon Abril [Alcaraz (Albacete), ca. 1540 - Medina de Rioseco (Valladolid), 1595], tratando de contribuir, entre otras cosas, al estudio pormenorizado de dicha tematica en nuestro ambito hispanico, generalmente ausente en las publicacion...
Research Interests:
Leaving aside the usual approach to deliberation as a private or simulated weighing, based on the traditional model for practical reasoning, normative logic and argumentation schemes, we aim to characterize deliberation as a particular... more
Leaving aside the usual approach to deliberation as a private or simulated weighing, based on the traditional model for practical reasoning, normative logic and argumentation schemes, we aim to characterize deliberation as a particular instance of discursive interaction in the public arena in which information, options and preferences are evaluated and handled in order to achieve a decision or a practical resolution in a responsible and reasoned way; a crossroads between epistemic-discursive conditions and ethical-political programs. The deliberation has so far been a discursive figure with a seemingly long but somewhat episodic history. In spite of its Classical lineage, as a rhetorical genre (Rh. 1358b7 ff.) or as a practice related to prudential virtue (EN. 1140a25-27), it has never played a leading role in argumentation studies. Not even today: although some attention has been paid to it from fields such as discourse ethics, from the attempts of political philosophy to meet demo...
Aristotle’s Rhetoric assumes the exceptionable and multidimensional character of the allegations adduced as reasons for the conclusions of political (i.e., collective) practical arguments (proposals). This problem has been addressed in... more
Aristotle’s Rhetoric assumes the exceptionable and multidimensional character of the allegations adduced as reasons for the conclusions of political (i.e., collective) practical arguments (proposals). This problem has been addressed in terms of the incommensurability of value-based argumentation, an approach that seems to lead us to an evaluative dead-end. In the Aristotelian text, we find a different tactic. Aristotle analyses how the continuum between argument and argument criticism and the meta-argumentative scaling takes place in deliberative discourse.
Research Interests:
Page 1. Director Luis Vega Secretaria Lilian Bermejo Edición Digital Roberto Feltrero Revista Iberoamericana de Argumentación Revista Digital de Acceso Abierto http://e-spacio.uned.es:8080/fedora/revistaiberoargumentacion ...
In this chapter, I claim that, in what relates to their putative argumentative character and assessment, the lot of well-known thought experiments (in both Science and Philosophy) is similar to that of the classical fables, as analyzed... more
In this chapter, I claim that, in what relates to their putative argumentative character and assessment, the lot of well-known thought experiments (in both Science and Philosophy) is similar to that of the classical fables, as analyzed elsewhere (Olmos 2014). The short, condensed and schematic narratives provided by either classical fables or thought experiments carry an argumentative potential that can be (and in fact has been) variously used as basis for construing arguments according to different schemes in different settings. We have to analyze and assess each real concrete “argument in use” as pertaining to its own argumentative aims in its own context and try not to prejudge the form (analogy or other) it is going to take. Moreover, our analysis and our assessment of such “narrative arguments in use” would be, typically, argumentative practices themselves, in which our interpretation and our positive or negative appraisal of their relative strength will be, typically and preferably supported by reasons, and could be likewise contested.
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
This paper makes use of the concepts and theoretical framework developed within the field of Argumentation Theory to account for the structure and characteristics of abduction and of the comparative processes of weighing explanatory... more
This paper makes use of the concepts and theoretical framework developed within the field of Argumentation Theory to account for the structure and characteristics of abduction and of the comparative processes of weighing explanatory hypothesis. It elaborates an analysis of abduction based on its consideration as a meta-explanatory argumentation scheme while elucidating its relations with abductive reasoning and inference. The conceptualization of comparative processes of weighing explanatory hypothesis as complex and varied argumentative structures is presented as an alternative to the idea of providing a formally rigid and supposedly universal account of ‘inference to the best explanation’.
Research Interests:
Presentación Conferencia Magistral en V Coloquio Internacional: Derecho al Bienestar Humano, Ética Global y Educación
Universidad de Guanajuato (méxico)
6-8 Noviembre 2019
Universidad de Guanajuato (méxico)
6-8 Noviembre 2019
Research Interests:
Presentación Conferencia Magistral en el XXII EIDL/SIILA
Universidad Nacional de Nayarit, Tepic (Nayarit, México)
11-15 noviembre, 2019
Universidad Nacional de Nayarit, Tepic (Nayarit, México)
11-15 noviembre, 2019
Research Interests:
Presentación Universidad de Málaga mayo 2021