Bogency and Goodacies: On Argument Quality in Virtue Argumentation Theory

Bogency and Goodacies: On Argument Quality in Virtue Argumentation Theory

Show other versions (1)

Virtue argumentation theory (VAT) has been charged of being incomplete, given its alleged inability to account for argument cogency in virtue-theoretical terms. Instead of defending VAT against that challenge, I suggest it is misplaced, since it is based on a premise VAT does not endorse, and raises...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Fabio Paglieri
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: University of Windsor 2015-03-01
Series:Informal Logic
Subjects:
Virtue Argumentation Theory
Argument Quality
Validity
Conflicting Virtues
Online Access:https://ojs.uwindsor.ca/ojs/leddy/index.php/informal_logic/article/view/4209
id doaj-e5250f9e107946e6b21f2f91bed2d67d
record_format Article
spelling doaj-e5250f9e107946e6b21f2f91bed2d67d2020-11-25T03:14:11ZengUniversity of WindsorInformal Logic0824-25770824-25772015-03-01351658710.22329/il.v35i1.42093395Bogency and Goodacies: On Argument Quality in Virtue Argumentation TheoryFabio Paglieri0Istituto di Scienze e Tecnologie della Cognizione, CNR Roma, ItalyVirtue argumentation theory (VAT) has been charged of being incomplete, given its alleged inability to account for argument cogency in virtue-theoretical terms. Instead of defending VAT against that challenge, I suggest it is misplaced, since it is based on a premise VAT does not endorse, and raises an issue that most versions of VAT need not consider problematic. This in turn allows distinguishing several varieties of VAT, and clarifying what really matters for them.https://ojs.uwindsor.ca/ojs/leddy/index.php/informal_logic/article/view/4209Virtue Argumentation TheoryArgument QualityValidityConflicting Virtues
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Fabio Paglieri
spellingShingle Fabio Paglieri
Bogency and Goodacies: On Argument Quality in Virtue Argumentation Theory
Informal Logic
Virtue Argumentation Theory
Argument Quality
Validity
Conflicting Virtues
author_facet Fabio Paglieri
author_sort Fabio Paglieri
title Bogency and Goodacies: On Argument Quality in Virtue Argumentation Theory
title_short Bogency and Goodacies: On Argument Quality in Virtue Argumentation Theory
title_full Bogency and Goodacies: On Argument Quality in Virtue Argumentation Theory
title_fullStr Bogency and Goodacies: On Argument Quality in Virtue Argumentation Theory
title_full_unstemmed Bogency and Goodacies: On Argument Quality in Virtue Argumentation Theory
title_sort bogency and goodacies: on argument quality in virtue argumentation theory
publisher University of Windsor
series Informal Logic
issn 0824-2577
0824-2577
publishDate 2015-03-01
description Virtue argumentation theory (VAT) has been charged of being incomplete, given its alleged inability to account for argument cogency in virtue-theoretical terms. Instead of defending VAT against that challenge, I suggest it is misplaced, since it is based on a premise VAT does not endorse, and raises an issue that most versions of VAT need not consider problematic. This in turn allows distinguishing several varieties of VAT, and clarifying what really matters for them.
topic Virtue Argumentation Theory
Argument Quality
Validity
Conflicting Virtues
url https://ojs.uwindsor.ca/ojs/leddy/index.php/informal_logic/article/view/4209
work_keys_str_mv AT fabiopaglieri bogencyandgoodaciesonargumentqualityinvirtueargumentationtheory
_version_ 1724644057014075392

Similar Items