Una modesta proposición para clasificar las teorías de los argumentos

Hubert Marraud

doi:10.29105/aitas2.3-29

Authors

Hubert Marraud Universidad Autónoma de Madrid https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4039-1010

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.29105/aitas2.3-29

Keywords:

holism, references, reasons, Toulmin model, warrants

Abstract

I propose to classify the theories of argument (or logics, in a certain sense) according to three oppositions: atomism vs. holism, generalism vs. particularism, and inferencism vs. reasonism. The first two come from the theory of normative reasons and the third is of my own, although the need to make some similar distinction has been defended by many authors. Finally, I will describe a holistic, particularist and reasonist model, contrasting it with the dominant atomist, generalist and inferentialist models.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Blackburn, Simon. The Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005.

Bader, Ralf. “Conditions, Modifiers and Holism”, en Errol Lord and Barry Maguire, eds., Weighing Reasons, 27-55. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199315192.003.0002

Blair, J. Anthony. Groundwork in the Theory of Argumentation. Dordrecht, Heidelberg, Londres y Nueva York: Springer, 2012.

Dancy, Jonathan. Ethics without Principles. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2004. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/0199270023.001.0001

Harman, Gilbert. Internal Critique: A Logic is not a Theory of Reasoning and a Theory of Reasoning is not a Logic. En Gabbay, D.M., Johnson, R.H., Ohlbach, H.J. y Woods, J., eds., Handbook of the Logic of Argument and Inference, 171-186. Amsterdam: North Holland, 2002. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1570-2464(02)80006-4

Horty, John “Reasoning with Precedents as Constrained Natural Reasoning”, en Errol Lord y Barry Maguire, eds., Weighing Reasons. Nueva York: Oxford University Press, 2016. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199315192.003.0010

Johnson, Ralph H. Manifest Rationality. A Pragmatic Theory of Argument. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 2000.

Lamond, Grant (2016). "Precedent and Analogy in Legal Reasoning", en Edward N. Zalta, ed., The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2016/entries/legal-reas-prec/, 2016.

Leal, Fernando M. y Marraud, Hubert. How Philosophers Argue. An Adversarial Collaboration on the Russell-Copleston Debate. Cham: Springer, 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-85368-6

Levi, Don S. (1995). “The Case of the Missing Premise”. Informal Logic, Vol. 17, No. 1, 67-88, 1995. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22329/il.v17i1.2396

Marraud, Hubert. “On the Logical Ways to Counter an Argument: A Typology and Some Theoretical Consequences”. En Frans H. van Eemeren y Bart Garssen, eds., From Argument Schemes to Argumentative Relations in the Wild, 149-166. Cham: Springer, 2020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-28367-4_10

Hubert Marraud, En buena lógica. Guadalajara: Editorial de la Universidad de Guadalajara, 2020.

Marraud, Hubert. “Holismo y atomismo en teoría de los argumentos”. Diálogo filosófico. 111, 401 – 418, 2021.

Marraud, Hubert. “4 modelos de argumento”. Quadripartita Ratio. 6 (11), 17 – 40, 2021.

Redondo, María Cristina. “Razones y normas”. Discusiones, núm.5 (2005), 29-66. DOI: https://doi.org/10.52292/j.dsc.2005.2576

Toulmin, Stephen E. The Uses of Argument, ed. rev. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003 [1958]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511840005

Toulmin, Stephen E., Rieke, Richard y Janik, Allan. Una introducción al razonamiento. Traducción al español de José Gascón. Lima: Palestra, 2018 [1984].

Vega Reñón, Luis. “Deliberando sobre la deliberación. Una revisión”. Lógoi. Revista de Filosofía núm. 38, año 22 (2020), pp. 166-200.

Vreeswijk, Gerard A.W. “Abstract Argumentation Systems”. Artificial Intelligence 90 (1977), 225-279. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0004-3702(96)00041-0

Wellman, Carl. Challenge and Response: Justification in Ethics. Carbondale IL: Southern Illinois University Press, 1971.

Wenzel, Joseph. Three Perspectives on Argument. Rhetoric, Dialectic, Logic. En R. Trapp, y J.H. Schuetz, eds., Perspectives on Argumentation: Essays in Honor of Wayne Brockriede, 9-26. Nueva York: Idebate Pres, 2006 [1990].

Woods, John. “The fragility of argument”. En F. Paglieri, L., Bonelli y S. Felletti eds., The Psychology of Argument, pp. 91-128. Londres: College Publications, 2016.