Profiles of Dialogue for Amphiboly

Walton, Douglas

doi:10.22329/il.v40i1.5997

Cited by 3 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 9 publications

(23 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Rather, it can be more or less rationally warranted depending on whether the epistemic conditions described as closed world assumption and exhaustive search are fulfilled (Walton, 1995(Walton, , 1999. That people are aware of these conditions and can make judgements about them is evident in at least two ways.…”

Section: Human Health and No Evidence Statementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Convincing a Sceptical Public: The Challenge for Public Health

Cummings

2020

The Humanities in Asia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Public health communications are an everyday occurrence. Notwithstanding the frequency of these communications, compliance with them and the recommendations they contain is often limited. In this chapter, it is argued that one of the reasons for poor compliance is the failure on the part of experts to construct public health messages that accord with the rational resources of the public. For this to be achieved, experts must develop a better appreciation of the reasoning strategies that lay people use to assess risks to their health. This chapter presents an extended theoretical discussion of how one set of strategies in particular, a group of cognitive heuristics based on the informal fallacies, has the potential to facilitate decisionmaking about public health issues (Cummings, 2014a(Cummings, , 2015a).Among the informal fallacies, the argument from ignorance plays a particularly central role in public health communication. A comparative analysis is undertaken of the use of this argument in the public health communications issued by the Department of Health in Hong Kong and Public Health England in the UK. It is argued that there are qualitative differences in the use of the argument from ignorance across these two contexts. These differences influence the way in which the argument is rationally evaluated in these two public health contexts. Specifically, the public in Hong Kong is encouraged to reflect on epistemic conditions that are integral to the rational warrant of this argument. These conditions are less often acknowledged by public health agencies in the UK. Greater rational evaluation of these conditions, it is argued, leads to better decision-making in matters relating to public health.

show abstract

Section: Human Health and No Evidence Statementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Convincing a Sceptical Public: The Challenge for Public Health

Cummings

2020

The Humanities in Asia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Secundum Quid and the Pragmatics of Arguments. The Challenges of the Dialectical Tradition

Macagno

2022

Argumentation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The phrase secundum quid et simpliciter is the Latin expression translating and labelling the sophism described by Aristotle as connected with the use of some particular expression "absolutely or in a certain respect and not in its proper sense." This paper presents an overview of the analysis of this fallacy in the history of dialectics, reconstructing the different explanations provided in the Aristotelian texts, the Latin and medieval dialectical tradition, and the modern logical approaches. The secundum quid emerges as a strategy that is based on the pragmatic dimension of arguments, and in particular the complex passage from an utterance (what is said) to its logical form (a proposition in an argument). The medieval and modern logical theories attempted to explain from different philosophical perspectives how the pragmatically enriched semantic representation can be achieved, justified, and most importantly manipulated. The different analyses of this fallacy bring to light various dimensions of the pragmatics of arguments, and the complex interdependence between context, meaning, and inferences.

show abstract

Argumentation Skills for the Design of Formative Assessment Queries

Campillo

Ramos

2022

Design and Measurement Strategies for Meaningful Learning

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This chapter surveys the benefits of critical and argument skills in bilingual pre-service teachers' future careers for assessment pursuits. It also examines how informal logic for pedagogical purposes is scarcely considered in education settings – both primary and university levels. Yet, such a lack of teacher training will negatively influence subsequent feedback and ad hoc formative assessments to measure bilingual pupils' knowledge accurately. Hence, taking as referents argumentation and critical thinking and enquiring, the chapter aims to establish the fundamental theoretical foundations for understanding and designing formative queries.

show abstract

Profiles of Dialogue for Amphiboly

Cited by 3 publications

References 9 publications

Convincing a Sceptical Public: The Challenge for Public Health

Convincing a Sceptical Public: The Challenge for Public Health

Secundum Quid and the Pragmatics of Arguments. The Challenges of the Dialectical Tradition

Argumentation Skills for the Design of Formative Assessment Queries

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About