A dialectical view on conduction: Reasons, warrants, and normal suasory inclinations

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Bibtex

@article{caa6aee6e5c14dd0a923283f10597f0a,
title = "A dialectical view on conduction: Reasons, warrants, and normal suasory inclinations",
abstract = "Carl Wellman (1971) introduced the reasoning-type conduction while en-dorsing a dialectical view on natural lan-guage argumentation. Contemporary schol-arship, by contrast, treats conductive argu-ment predominantly on a product view. Not only did Wellman's reasons for a dialectical view thereby fall into disregard; a product-treatment of conduction also flouts the standard semantics of 'argument'. This pa-per traces why Wellman held a dialectical view regarding the role of defeasible war-rants. These act as stand-ins for (parts of) value hierarchies that arguers of normal suasory inclination find acceptable. We also improve on how to diagram conduction and distinguish two of its structural variants.",
keywords = "Claim-to-validity, Conductive argument, Degrees of importance, Dialectical view, Pro and con reasons, Product view, Value hierarchy",
author = "Shiyang Yu and Frank Zenker",
year = "2019",
doi = "10.22329/il.v39i1.5080",
language = "English",
volume = "39",
pages = "32--69",
journal = "Informal Logic",
issn = "0824-2577",
publisher = "Informal Logic, University of Windsor, ON, Canada",
number = "1",

}