Question-Begging Under a Non-Foundational Model of Argument

DSpace/Manakin Repository

Question-Begging Under a Non-Foundational Model of Argument

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.author Suber, Peter
dc.date.accessioned 2010-03-08T16:04:17Z
dc.date.issued 1994
dc.identifier.citation Suber, Peter. 1994. Question-begging under a non-foundational model of argument. Argumentation 8(3): 241-250. en_US
dc.identifier.issn 0920-427X en_US
dc.identifier.issn 1572-8374 en_US
dc.identifier.uri http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:3715474
dc.description.abstract I find (as others have found) that question-begging is formally valid but rationally unpersuasive. More precisely, itought to be unpersuasive, although it can often persuade. Despite its formal validity, question-begging fails to establish its conclusion; in this sense it fails under a classical or foundationalist model of argument. But it does link its conclusion to its premises by means of acceptable rules of inference; in this sense it succeeds under a non-classical, non-foundationalist model of argument which is spelled out in the essay. However, even for the latter model question-begging fails to link the conclusion to premises that the unconvinced would find more acceptable than the conclusion. The essay includes reflections on the conditions under which the circularity of mutually supporting claims can avoid question-begging and legitimately be persuasive. en_US
dc.description.sponsorship Other Research Unit en_US
dc.language.iso en_US en_US
dc.publisher Springer Verlag en_US
dc.relation.isversionof doi:10.1007/BF00711191 en_US
dc.relation.hasversion http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/writing/bq.htm en_US
dash.license LAA
dc.subject begging the question en_US
dc.subject question-begging en_US
dc.subject petitio principii en_US
dc.subject circular reasoning en_US
dc.subject non-foundationalism en_US
dc.subject coherentism en_US
dc.subject vouching en_US
dc.subject philosophy
dc.subject logic
dc.subject rhetoric
dc.title Question-Begging Under a Non-Foundational Model of Argument en_US
dc.type Journal Article en_US
dc.description.version Accepted Manuscript en_US
dc.relation.journal Argumentation en_US
dash.depositing.author Suber, Peter
dc.date.available 2010-03-08T16:04:17Z

Files in this item

Files Size Format View
suber_argum.html 35.35Kb HTML View/Open

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

 
 

Search DASH


Advanced Search
 
 

Submitters