Skip to main content

Appeals to Considerations

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
On Reasoning and Argument

Part of the book series: Argumentation Library ((ARGA,volume 30))

  • 1375 Accesses

Abstract

Following Wellman, Trudy Govier has developed a comprehensive approach to the analysis and evaluation of what she calls “conductive arguments”. There is indeed a distinct form of reasoning and argument of the sort Wellman and Govier describe, but both the label ‘conduction’ and the common metaphor of weighing up the pros and cons are misleading. The form of reasoning and argument is better described as an appeal to considerations (or to criteria). The considerations cited are features of a subject of interest, and the conclusion drawn from them is the attribution of some supervenient status to that subject, such as a classification, an evaluation, a prescription or an interpretation. The conclusion of such reasoning may follow either conclusively from its premisses or non-conclusively or not at all. Weighing the pros and cons, however construed, is only one way of judging whether the conclusion follows, and perhaps only a last resort in making such judgments. Further, the move from information about the subject’s cited features to the attribution of a supervenient status is often but one moment in a more complex process, a move that is typically preceded by other reasoning moves and may be followed by still others. In a thorough discussion of the supervenient status of such a subject, the relevant considerations and counter-considerations would ideally be integrated in such a way as to take the sting out of the counter-considerations.

Bibliographical note: “Appeals to considerations” was originally published in Informal Logic 33 (2013), 195–237.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Here and in the rest of this article citations whose author is unnamed are to Govier ’s publications listed in the references.

  2. 2.

    R. v. N.S., 2012 SCC 72. The decision is available at: http://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/2012/2012scc72/2012scc72.html; accessed 2016 08 09.

  3. 3.

    Darren Naish, “What is the definition of ‘reptile’?”, Ask a Biologist (http://www.askabiologist.org.uk/answers/viewtopic.php?id=855; accessed 2012 12 06).

  4. 4.

    Added in the present republication: The prior probability and the posterior and prior likelihoods are to be calculated with reference to the total evidence at the disposal of the person doing the calculation.

  5. 5.

    ‘(7)’ here looks like a misprint for ‘(8)’.

  6. 6.

    Added in the present republication: The (R) conditions are the conditions that the premisses of a cogent argument must be relevant (R) to the conclusion, in the sense they provide some evidence for it. The (G) condition is the condition that considered together the premisses must provide adequate grounds (G) for accepting the conclusion. The (A) condition is the condition that the premisses of a cogent argument must be acceptable (A), in the sense that it is reasonable for the person to whom the argument is addressed to accept them. Govier takes the ARG conditions to be individually necessary and jointly sufficient for an argument to be cogent, in the sense of being rationally compelling.

References

  • Allen, Derek. 2011. Conductive arguments and the Toulmin model: a case study. In Conductive argument: An overlooked type of defeasible reasoning, ed. J. Anthony Blair and Ralph H. Johnson, 167–190. London: College Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baier, Kurt. 1958. The moral point of view. New York: Random House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bailin, Sharon, and Mark Battersby. 2010. Reason in the balance: An inquiry approach to critical thinking. Toronto: McGraw-Hill Ryerson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Battersby, Mark, and Sharon Bailin 2011. Guidelines for reaching a reasoned judgment. In Conductive argument: An overlooked type of defeasible reasoning, ed. J. Anthony Blair and Ralph H. Johnson, 145–157. London: College Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blair, J. Anthony, and Ralph H. Johnson, eds. 2011. Conductive argument: An overlooked type of defeasible reasoning. London: College Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ennis, R.H. 2001. Argument appraisal strategy: A comprehensive approach. Informal Logic 21: 97–140.

    Google Scholar 

  • Franklin, Benjamin. 1956. Mr. Franklin: A selection from his personal letters, edited by W.J. Bell Jr. and L.W. Labaree. New Haven: Yale University Press. Letter of 1772 to Joseph Priestley at http://www.procon.org/view.background-resource.php?resourceID=1474; accessed 2016 08 11.

  • Freeman, James B. 2011. Evaluating conductive arguments: Critical questions in light of the Toulmin model. In Conductive argument: An overlooked type of defeasible reasoning, ed. J. Anthony Blair and Ralph H. Johnson, 127–144. London: College Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goddu, Geoffrey C. 2001. The ‘most important and fundamental’ distinction in logic. lnformaI Logic 22: 1–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Govier, Trudy. 1979. Challenge and Response: Carl Wellman. Informal Logic Newsletter 2(2): 10–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Govier, Trudy. 1980. Assessing arguments: what range of standards? Informal Logic Newsletter 3(1): 2–4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Govier, Trudy. 1985, 1988, 1992, 1997, 2001, 2005, 2010. A practical study of argument, 1st through 7th editions. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

    Google Scholar 

  • Govier, Trudy. 1987a. Two unreceived views about reasoning and argument. In Problems in argument analysis and evaluation, by Trudy Govier, 55–80. Dordrecht: Foris.

    Google Scholar 

  • Govier, Trudy. 1987b. Beyond induction and deduction. In Argumentation: Across the lines of discipline: Proceedings of the Conference on Argumentation 1986, ed. Frans H. van Eemeren, Rob Grootendorst, J. Anthony Blair, and Charles A. Willard, 57–64. Dordrecht: Foris.

    Google Scholar 

  • Govier, Trudy. 1999. Reasoning with pros and cons: Conductive arguments revisited. In The philosophy of argument, by Trudy Govier, 155–180. Newport News, VA: Vale Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Govier, Trudy. 2011. Conductive arguments: Overview of the symposium. In Conductive argument: An overlooked type of defeasible reasoning, ed. J. Anthony Blair and Ralph H. Johnson, 262–276. London: College Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hansen, Hans V. 2011. Notes on balance-of-considerations arguments. In Conductive argument: An overlooked type of defeasible reasoning, ed. J. Anthony Blair and Ralph H. Johnson, 30–51. London: College Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hitchcock, David. 1980. Deductive and inductive: Types of validity, not types of argument. Informal Logic Newsletter 2(3): 9–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hitchcock, David. 1981. Deduction, induction and conduction. Informal Logic Newsletter 3(2): 7–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hitchcock, David. 2002. Sampling scholarly arguments: A test of a theory of good inference (plus “Appendix”). In Argumentation and its applications, ed. Hans V. Hansen, Christopher W. Tindale, J. Anthony Blair, Ralph H. Johnson and Robert C. Pinto,. Windsor, ON: OSSA. CD-ROM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hitchcock, David. 2009. The culture of spoken arguments (plus “Appendix”). In Argument cultures: Proceedings of OSSA 09, ed. Juho Ritola. Windsor, ON: OSSA. CD-ROM.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jin, Rongdon. 2011. The structure of pro and con arguments: A survey of the theories. In Conductive argument: An overlooked type of defeasible reasoning, ed. J. Anthony Blair and Ralph H. Johnson, 10–30. London: College Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kauffeld, Fred. 2011. Ranking considerations and aligning probative obligations. In Conductive argument: An overlooked type of defeasible reasoning, ed. J. Anthony Blair and Ralph H. Johnson, 158–166. London: College Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Naess, Arne. 1966. Communication and argument: Elements of applied semantics. Totowa, NJ: Bedminster Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oregon, State of. 2011. Death with Dignity Act. Oregon revised statutes 127.800 to 127.895. Available at https://public.health.oregon.gov/ProviderPartnerResources/EvaluationResearch/DeathwithDignityAct/Documents/statute.pdf; accessed 2016 08 12.

  • Pinto, Robert C. 2011. Weighing evidence in the context of conductive reasoning. In Conductive argument: An overlooked type of defeasible reasoning, ed. J. Anthony Blair and Ralph H. Johnson, 104–126. London: College Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pollock, John L. 1995. Cognitive carpentry: A blueprint for how to build a person. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pollock, John L. 2001. Defeasible reasoning with variable degrees of justification. Artificial Intelligence 133: 233–282.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wellman, Carl. 1971. Challenge and response: Justification in ethics. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wohlrapp, Harald R. 2008. Der Begriff des Arguments. Über die Beziehungen zwischen Wissen, Forschung, Glauben, Subjektivität und Vernunft. Würzburg: Königshausen und Neumann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wohlrapp, Harald R. 2011. Conductive argument: A misleading model for the analysis of pro- and contra- argumentation. In Conductive argument: An overlooked type of defeasible reasoning, ed. J. Anthony Blair and Ralph H. Johnson, 210–223. London: College Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wohlrapp, Harald. 2014. The concept of argument: A philosophical foundation. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to David Hitchcock .

16.9 Appendix: Examples of Conductive Reasoning

16.9 Appendix: Examples of Conductive Reasoning

Govier cites the following five passages as examples of conductive argument:

  1. 1.

    There can be no doubt that Emily Bronte casts a vague incestuous aura over the entire plot of Wuthering Heights. Heathcliff marries his lost love’s sister-in-law; his wife’s son marries her brother’s daughter; Cathy’s daughter marries her brother’s son. An unconsciously incestuous love between the two leading characters would not run counter to the tone of a novel filled with violent and savage scenes, such as the sadistic rubbing of a wrist over a broken window-pane, Cathy’s fierce delirium, or the sight of Heathcliff smashing his bloody head against a tree. (Eric Solomon, ‘The incest theme in Wuthering Heights’, Nineteenth Century Fiction 14 (1951), pp. 82–83; cited by Govier in (1987a, p. 71) and (1999, p. 165))

  2. 2.

    That ‘this exists’ has any meaning in such cases, where, as Mr. Russell would say, we are using ‘this’ as a ‘proper name’ for something with which we are acquainted, is, I know, disputed; my view that it has involves, I am bound to admit, the curious consequence that ‘this exists’ when used in this way is always true, and ‘this does not exist’ always false; and I have little to say in its favor except that it seems to me so plainly true that, in the case of every sense-datum I have, it is logically possible that the sense-datum in question should not have existed – that there should simply have been no such thing. (G. E. Moore , ‘Is existence a predicate?’, in his Philosophical Papers (London: George Allen and Unwin, 1959), p. 126; cited by Govier in (1987a, p. 72)

  3. 3.

    Or we might talk about the “deeper truth” in myths, the more profound lessons Santa can teach. But this is a cheat, for two reasons. It fudges the fact that, on the mundane issue of where presents come from, parents know that what they’re saying is false. (Real myth-makers believe their myths.) And it finds a deeper truth where there doesn’t seem to be one. In the Santa story, presents come from a stranger who gives gifts to everyone. In reality, presents come from parents who love their kids as individuals and give gifts to express this love. Isn’t the reality more worth knowing than the myth? (Thomas Hurka, cited by Govier as from “a newspaper column” (1997, pp. 447–449, 1999, p. 160))

  4. 4.

    Usually the Santa lie, befitting Christmas, is a white lie.

    For starters, the lie is only temporary. You tell kids about Santa now, but you’ll straighten them out later. The deception isn’t forever. And the deception is a mild one. You don’t take a falsehood and call it truth; you take a fiction and call it truth—a smaller distortion. This means the loss of the illusion is gentler. When kids are older they don’t lose Santa entirely, they just think of him in a different way. Finally, the deception is good for kids. Believing in Santa adds magic and excitement to Christmas; the anticipation is keener, the delight sharper. Parental love is fine and even profound, but a gift more the North Pole is far from exotic. (Thomas Hurka, cited by Govier as from “a newspaper column” (1997, pp. 447–449, 1999, p. 161))

  5. 5.

    (W)hile I like to think of my lifestyle as environmentally conscious, it’s actually not all that pure. To get to our house in the country, where the air is cleaner than it is in New York City, my husband and I rack up 350 miles every week. In the summer we pick fresh vegetables and fruit from our own garden, but in the winter we buy them from health food stores that truck them east from organic farms in California. And as a writer, I use paper—a great deal of paper—and that requires the felling of trees, even when I consciously write on both sides. Unavoidably, I use energy, and using energy makes waste. (Trebbe Johnson, ‘Learning to love the waste’, cited by Govier without further attribution in (1997, p. 446) and (1999, pp. 161–162))

The following examples were obtained through a Google search using the exact phrase “taking all these factors into account”. Among the first 10 search results, some did not use this phrase to introduce a conclusion drawn from premisses. Others involved calculation, for example in drawing a conclusion about the size of an increase in the cost of living. Others involved predicting an effect on the basis of causally relevant factors. I quote the remaining three examples of apparently conductive reasoning.

  1. 6.

    The New Jersey Academy of Orthotists and Prosthetists has cancelled its annual conference, scheduled from Nov. 7-9 [2012–DH] in Atlantic City, NJ. Hurricane Sandy hit the Jersey shore and disrupted all essential services in the tri-state area, including NJ, NY and Conn. The New Jersey Academy of Orthotists and Prosthetists (NJAAOP) board and committee discussed the feasibility of going ahead with our conference. The major factors we considered were first, the safety of our members, and second, the lack of information from the hotel regarding the conditions at the hotel and in Atlantic City. The final factor was that most of our attendees have been out of work for assembly and it would be a hardship for them to attempt to attend the conference and miss 3 more days of work. Many members had flooding of their homes and many would not have access to gasoline for the trip. Taking all these factors into account we decided to cancel. We struggled with the decision but in the end we felt it was the right thing to do. (Carey Glass, President, NJAAOP, “NJAAOP meeting cancelled due to hurricane”, November 6, 2012; http://www.healio.com/orthotics-prosthetics/education/news/online/%7Bba3c371d-1bf6-448b-82fc-b20e78c36571%7D/njaaop-meeting-cancelled-due-to-hurricane; accessed 2016 08 12)

  2. 7.

    What to Look for in Voice Recognition Software

    We based our review on a few simple criteria, all of which are important in a useful voice recognition program.

    Features

    This specialized software has to have the right kind of features. For instance, there needs to be a voice training of some kind to help the computer become familiar with your voice. Other features like customizable commands and accent support also expand the usefulness of the program.

    Commands

    The primary function of this software is to let you navigate your computer by voice. That means you must be able to open and close other programs and use the features within them all by voice command.

    Dictation

    The second most important function is dictation. This allows you to speak text into Word or other text editor. But the program must be good at recognizing speech in order to accurately transcribe it to text, so dictation is the true test of a good voice recognition program.

    Accuracy

    We tested the programs in dictation mode and assigned a score to each one based on how many errors they made in transcribing speech. A higher score means a program is better at handling all kinds of words. You can see the full results of our test in the Dictation Test article.

    Ease of Use

    Even if a program is excellent at interpreting your voice, it’s practically useless if the commands and menus are difficult to use.

    By taking all these factors into account, you can accurately choose software that suits you. Depending on your needs, you may find some features are more important than others. For instance, some people might be more interested in commands than dictation capabilities, so be sure to consult the scores for each review category. (“2013 compare best voice recognition software”, Top Ten Reviews, http://voice-recognition-software-review.toptenreviews.com/; accessed 2012 12 04, not found 2016 08 12)

  3. 8.

    Aiming at the measurement, comparison and ranking of all kinds of public dangers, ranging from natural hazards to industrial risks and political perils, the preparation of national risk registers stands out as a novel and increasingly popular Western security practice. This article focuses on these registers and the analytical power politics in which they are complicit. We argue, first, that positing science as an objective determinant of security truth, national risk registers advance a modernist understanding of how knowledge of national dangers can be arrived at, discounting both sovereign and popular authorities; second, that by operationalizing a traditional risk-assessment formula, risk registers make possible seemingly apolitical decisions in security matters, taken on the basis of cost–benefit thinking; and, third, that risk registers’ focus on risk ‘themes’ tiptoes around the definition of referent objects, avoiding overt decisions about the beneficiaries of particular security decisions. Taking all these factors into account, we find that risk registers ‘depoliticize’ national security debates while transforming national insecurity into something permanent and inevitable. (abstract of: Jonas Hagmann and Myriam Dunn Cavelty, “National risk registers: Security scientism and the propagation of permanent insecurity”, Security Dialogue (February 2012), 43/1: 79–96; doi:10.1177/0967010611430436)

A Google search using the phrase “so on balance” turned up no substantive pieces of reasoning; in many cases, nothing preceded the phrase. The phrase “therefore on balance” produced the following four examples of apparent conductive reasoning among the first 10 results:

  1. 9.

    Really difficult to review accurately but, on balance, we loved it and would return.

    The hotel has a glorious setting right on the beach which is well groomed and clean. Security is excellent both on the beach and in the hotel ‘grounds’. The dive centre combined with the ecological centre are also excellent and have plenty of ‘kit’ for hire including life jackets. If you like snorkelling, it’s easy to get into the water from the beach, the bay is quite shallow & there is plenty to see including turtles, rays and a host of coral reef fish with some stunning colours. We didn’t have children with us but if we had, it would be perfect for them.

    The restaurant was excellent. We did not have a bad meal. If we had known beforehand that the quality was as good as it was, we would have purchased a meal deal in advance saving 10% on bills.

    The rooms are kept very clean and the WiFi was a godsend.

    After all that, why didn’t I give it an ‘excellent’ rating?

    Despite the fact that we would definitely return, the rooms in the hotel block are a bit ‘tired’ and need refurbishment. The wall & floor tiles need replacing, the kitchenettes need ripping out and updating, the aircon units need remote controls, the rooms need more power points available for recharging phones & iPads etc., and the light fittings [sic] need fittings. The WiFi signal is not strong enough since it ‘drops out’ when it shouldn’t, the pool is functional but its poolside furniture is tired and needs replacing.

    All of the above might be ‘picky’ but my biggest gripe is that the bay is invaded by snorkel tours with seemingly no regulation. Those arriving by road seem fine but those disgorged into the bay by boats that moor up to await repatriation create a ‘too busy’ environment. My worry is that if the numbers of visitors are not controlled in some way, the turtles that everyone comes to see will be hounded out of ‘their bay’.

    Before 09:30 in the morning, the bay is delightful. After 17:00 it is equally delightful. The hotel has it’s [sic] own part of the beach that is shaded with palm trees and where loungers are available. You just have to ask. The ‘offcomers’ are kept at a distance and that allows a really relaxing session on the beach with plenty of space.

    Therefore, on balance, we loved it and would return. (review on tripadvisor.ca of Hotel Akumai Caribe, 24 November 2012, http://www.tripadvisor.ca/ShowUserReviews-g499445-d252781-r146088666-Hotel_Akumal_Caribe-Akumal_Yucatan_Peninsula.html; accessed 2016 08 12)

  2. 10.

    BUSINESSEUROPE would like to express its strong concern regarding the Commission’s proposal for “backloading” in the EU Emission Trading Scheme (ETS).

    European business supports the central role played by the ETS in the EU climate policy and has called on EU policy-makers to start an open debate, involving all stakeholders, on the level of ambition for the EU ETS post 2020. This needs to take place within the context of a comprehensive debate about the future of the EU’s energy, climate and industrial policies. An improved coherence among these policies will be crucial for the competitiveness of European industry.

    Prior to this longer-term view being developed, short-term measures such as changes to the ETS auctioning regulation to “backload” allowances must be avoided as these would interfere with a more constructive discussion on how to achieve a systemic solution. Pre-emptive short-term measures would create a precedent, resulting in greater uncertainty, and could have major repercussions for European business, which is already under strain from the economic crisis.

    Therefore, on balance, European business cannot support the proposal for a review of the auction time profile to implement a “backloading” in the EU ETS. (BUSINESSEUROPE, 3 October 2012, http://ec.europa.eu/clima/consultations/docs/0016/organisation/businesseurope_en.pdf; accessed 2016 08 12)

  3. 11.

    Two problematic spindle cell sarcomas involving upper jawbones in two adult male patients have been studied by histology, immunohistochemistry, and transmission electron microscopy, and respectively graded as low-grade malignancy and high-grade malignancy. While any single methodological study did not allow confident classification of them into one or other of the classical categories of spindle cell sarcomas (fibrosarcoma versus leiomyosarcoma), the overall contribution from all three methodologies ultimately allowed them to be categorized as sarcomas with myofibroblastic differentiation. Histologically, both tumors had morphological features of an amalgama [sic] between neoplastic fibroblasts and smooth muscle cells. Immunohistochemically, both tumors expressed reactivity only for muscle specific actin and alpha smooth muscle actin, in addition to vimentin. Ultrastructurally, both tumors, while showing fibroblast-like cytoplasmic features, had a spurious and imperfectly organized cell surface defying convincing classification into any of specific categories (i.e., both appeared in terms of ultrastructure as poorly differentiated sarcoma [sic], the former with low level of smooth muscle differentiation and possibly the presence of some fibronexus component, the latter with no smooth muscle differentiation but with possible evidence of very rare fibronectin fibril). Therefore, on balance, the most tenable diagnosis seemed to us that of a myofibrosarcoma in both cases. This work is presented considering the fact that myofibrosarcoma currently represents a topical theme of debate, and that this is the first report in medical literature concerning with [sic] myofibrosarcomas of the head and neck area in adults. (abstract of: Bisceglia M, Tricarico N, Minenna P, Magro G, Pasquinelli G. Myofibrosarcoma of the upper jawbones: a clinicopathologic and ultrastructural study of two cases. Ultrastruct Pathol (2001 Sep-Oct) 25(5):385–97. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11758720; accessed 2016 08 12)

  4. 12.

    We have consulted with our members in regards to the different options for international criminal health checks and would therefore like to make the following comments with respect to each of the options.

    Option 1: Applicant declaration only

    The APA [Australian Physiotherapy Association–DH] recognises that this is the least labour intensive option for both AHPRA [Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency–DH] and the registrants. However we recognise that the downside to this streamlined approach means that it is unlikely false declarations would be found.

    This is not a major concern to the APA as physiotherapy is a low risk profession as evidenced by the data produced by AHPRA in 2010/2011. Only one applicant had a condition or undertaking imposed on their registration as a result of the checks and no physiotherapy registrants had applications refused. Therefore, on balance this is not an unreasonable option for the registration of physiotherapists. (Australian Physiotherapy Association, Consultation paper on criminal history checks, addressed to the Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency, 17 December 2012, https://www.physiotherapy.asn.au/DocumentsFolder/APAWCM/Advocacy/Submissions2012_APAresponsetoAHPRAregarding_internationalcriminalhistorychecks.pdf; accessed 2016 08 12 )

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Hitchcock, D. (2017). Appeals to Considerations. In: On Reasoning and Argument. Argumentation Library, vol 30. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-53562-3_16

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics