Anticipating Objections as a Way of Coping With Dissensus

One of the traditional ways in which we manage dissensus is by argumentation, which may be construed as the attempt of the proponent to persuade rationally the other party of the truth (or acceptability) of some thesis. To achieve this, the arguer will often anticipate a possible objection. In this paper, I attempt to shed light on the normative aspect of the task of anticipating objections. I deal with such questions as: How is the arguer to anticipate objections? Which of the anticipated objections are to be dealt with? What is required to deal successfully with an objection

Defeasibility from the perspective of informal logic

The notions of defeasibility and defeasible reasoning have generated a great deal of interest in various research communities. Here I want to focus on their use in logic and argumentation studies. I will approach these topics from the perspective of an informal logician who finds himself struggling with some issues that surround the idea of and the deployment of the concept of defeasibility. My intention is to make those struggles as clear as I can

Theory and Practice Again: Challenges from Pinto and Toulmin

In Argument, Inference and Dialectic (2001) Pinto argues that critical practice can furnish us with the necessary guidance to answer our questions about argument and inference; we do not need to develop a theory of argument/inference. Pinto’s provocative remarks raise questions about the appeal to practice, and recall problems that Toulmin encounters in development of his innovative theory in The Uses of Argument (1958). In this paper, I juxtapose and reflect on these developments

More on arguers and their dialectical obligations

In her 1997 OSSA paper, Trudy Govier discusses in detail my thesis that arguers have dialectical obligations. In a 1998 paper she further examines this thesis to see whether it is viable and concludes that it faces serious problems. In this paper, I assess the state of the thesis in light of Govier\u27s discussion of it. I urge that we have something to gain from the empirical turn--from investigating best practices. At the end, I take a step back to ask what is really at issue here and how it connect s to other issues in the theory of argument