Based on what should we formulate a legitimate definition of quasi-logical arguments? Case study of arguments of reciprocity

Result code in IS VaVaI
<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00216224%3A14210%2F16%3A00090769" target="_blank" >RIV/00216224:14210/16:00090769 - isvavai.cz</a>
Result on the web
<a href="https://poznanreasoningweek.wordpress.com/" target="_blank" >https://poznanreasoningweek.wordpress.com/</a>
DOI - Digital Object Identifier
—

Result language
angličtina
Original language name
Based on what should we formulate a legitimate definition of quasi-logical arguments? Case study of arguments of reciprocity
Original language description
The paper attempts to formulate an explicit definition of the so-called quasi-logical arguments, the phenomenon originally defined by Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca in the new rhetoric. The new rhetoric is widely criticized as a model that provides a vague definition of its categories leading to possible different understanding categories and subsequently to different results when the categories are used in the analysis. The paper offers a case study of a particular subtype of quasi-logical arguments, so-called arguments of reciprocity.The paper is divided into two parts. The first part analyzes the sources of vagueness allowing different interpretations. The difference of interpretations is demonstrated by the analysis of three recent attempts to define arguments of reciprocity explicitly. The difference of interpretations raises the question of legitimacy of these interpretations given to the elements of the original category of Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca.
Czech name
—
Czech description
—

Publication year
2016
Confidentiality
S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Similar results(10)