Abstract
This paper is a critical assessment of argumentum ad baculum, or appeal to force. Its principal contention is that, contrary to common opinion, there is no general fallacy of ad baculum. Most real-life ad baculums are, in fact, fairly strong. A basic logical form for reconstructed ad baculums is proposed, and a number of heterodoxical conclusions are also advanced and argued for. They include that ad baculum is not necessarily a prudential argument, that ad baculum need not involve force, violence, or threats, and that one can argue ad baculum to oneself. The starting point of the paper, however, is a critical evaluation of three ad baculums from the exercise sets of Irving Copi's well-known Introduction to Logic.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Baum, Robert: 1981, Logic, 2nd edition, Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, New York.
Copi, Irving: 1986, Introduction to Logic, 7th edition, Macmillan, New York.
Copi, Irving: 1986, Solutions Manual, 7th edition, Macmillan, New York.
Hurley, Patrick: 1985, A Concise Introduction to Logic, 2nd edition, Wadsworth Publishing, Belmont, CA.
Van de Vate, Dwight: 1975, ‘The Appeal to Force’ Philosophy and Rhetoric 8, 43.
Walton, Douglas: 1984, Logical Dialogue-Games and Fallacies, University of America Press, Lanham, MD.
Woods, John and Douglas Walton: 1976, Grazer Philosophische Studien 2, 139.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Wreen, M.J. May the force be with you. Argumentation 2, 425–440 (1988). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00128985
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00128985