The polysemy of ‘fallacy’—or ‘bias’, for that matter

Frank Zenker

The polysemy of ‘fallacy’—or ‘bias’, for that matter

Forskningsoutput: Kapitel i bok/rapport/Conference proceeding › Konferenspaper i proceeding

Sammanfattning

Starting with a brief overview of current usages (Sect. 2), this paper offers some constituents of a use-based analysis of ‘fallacy’, listing 16 conditions that have, for the most part implicitly, been discussed in the literature (Sect. 3). Our thesis is that at least three related conceptions of ‘fallacy’ can be identified. The 16 conditions thus serve to “carve out” a semantic core and to distinguish three core-specifications. As our discussion suggests, these specifications can be related to three normative positions in the philosophy of human reasoning: the meliorist, the apologist, and the panglossian (Sect. 4). Seeking to make these conditions available for scholarly discussion, this analysis-sketch should not be viewed as final or exhaustive.

Originalspråk	engelska
Titel på värdpublikation	Argumentation, Objectivity and Bias
Redaktörer	Pat Bondy, Laura Benaquista
Utgivningsort	Windsor, Ontario
Antal sidor	14
Status	Published - 2016
Evenemang	11th Conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation, 18-21 May, 2016) - University of Windsor, Windsor, Kanada Varaktighet: 2016 maj 18 → 2016 maj 21

Publikationsserier

Namn	Proceedings of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation Conference
Volym	11
ISSN (tryckt)	2371-8323

Konferens

Konferens	11th Conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation, 18-21 May, 2016)
Land/Territorium	Kanada
Ort	Windsor
Period	2016/05/18 → 2016/05/21

Ämnesklassifikation (UKÄ)

Filosofi

Tillgång till dokument

http://scholar.uwindsor.ca/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2221&context=ossaarchiveLicens: CC BY

Andra filer och länkar

http://scholar.uwindsor.ca/ossaarchive/OSSA11/

Citera det här

@inproceedings{21c86929c8d34bf69cee81f92b739285,

title = "The polysemy of {\textquoteleft}fallacy{\textquoteright}—or {\textquoteleft}bias{\textquoteright}, for that matter",

abstract = "Starting with a brief overview of current usages (Sect. 2), this paper offers some constituents of a use-based analysis of {\textquoteleft}fallacy{\textquoteright}, listing 16 conditions that have, for the most part implicitly, been discussed in the literature (Sect. 3). Our thesis is that at least three related conceptions of {\textquoteleft}fallacy{\textquoteright} can be identified. The 16 conditions thus serve to “carve out” a semantic core and to distinguish three core-specifications. As our discussion suggests, these specifications can be related to three normative positions in the philosophy of human reasoning: the meliorist, the apologist, and the panglossian (Sect. 4). Seeking to make these conditions available for scholarly discussion, this analysis-sketch should not be viewed as final or exhaustive.",

keywords = "bias, fallacy, meaning analysis",

author = "Frank Zenker",

year = "2016",

language = "English",

series = "Proceedings of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation Conference",

editor = "Pat Bondy and Laura Benaquista",

booktitle = "Argumentation, Objectivity and Bias",

note = "11th Conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation, 18-21 May, 2016) ; Conference date: 18-05-2016 Through 21-05-2016",

}

Zenker, F 2016, The polysemy of ‘fallacy’—or ‘bias’, for that matter. i P Bondy & L Benaquista (red), Argumentation, Objectivity and Bias . Proceedings of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation Conference, vol. 11, Windsor, Ontario, 11th Conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation, 18-21 May, 2016), Windsor, Kanada, 2016/05/18. <http://scholar.uwindsor.ca/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2221&context=ossaarchive>

TY - GEN

T1 - The polysemy of ‘fallacy’—or ‘bias’, for that matter

AU - Zenker, Frank

PY - 2016

Y1 - 2016

N2 - Starting with a brief overview of current usages (Sect. 2), this paper offers some constituents of a use-based analysis of ‘fallacy’, listing 16 conditions that have, for the most part implicitly, been discussed in the literature (Sect. 3). Our thesis is that at least three related conceptions of ‘fallacy’ can be identified. The 16 conditions thus serve to “carve out” a semantic core and to distinguish three core-specifications. As our discussion suggests, these specifications can be related to three normative positions in the philosophy of human reasoning: the meliorist, the apologist, and the panglossian (Sect. 4). Seeking to make these conditions available for scholarly discussion, this analysis-sketch should not be viewed as final or exhaustive.

AB - Starting with a brief overview of current usages (Sect. 2), this paper offers some constituents of a use-based analysis of ‘fallacy’, listing 16 conditions that have, for the most part implicitly, been discussed in the literature (Sect. 3). Our thesis is that at least three related conceptions of ‘fallacy’ can be identified. The 16 conditions thus serve to “carve out” a semantic core and to distinguish three core-specifications. As our discussion suggests, these specifications can be related to three normative positions in the philosophy of human reasoning: the meliorist, the apologist, and the panglossian (Sect. 4). Seeking to make these conditions available for scholarly discussion, this analysis-sketch should not be viewed as final or exhaustive.

KW - bias

KW - fallacy

KW - meaning analysis

UR - http://scholar.uwindsor.ca/ossaarchive/OSSA11/

M3 - Paper in conference proceeding

T3 - Proceedings of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation Conference

BT - Argumentation, Objectivity and Bias

A2 - Bondy, Pat

A2 - Benaquista, Laura

CY - Windsor, Ontario

T2 - 11th Conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation, 18-21 May, 2016)

Y2 - 18 May 2016 through 21 May 2016

ER -

The polysemy of ‘fallacy’—or ‘bias’, for that matter

Sammanfattning

Publikationsserier

Konferens

Ämnesklassifikation (UKÄ)

Tillgång till dokument

Andra filer och länkar

Fingeravtryck

Citera det här