Advertisement

Argumentation

, Volume 14, Issue 4, pp 405–423 | Cite as

Reductionism in Fallacy Theory

  • Christoph Lumer
Article

Abstract

(1) The aim of the paper is to develop a reduction of fallacy theory, i.e. to 'deduce' fallacy theory from a positive theory of argumentation which provides exact criteria for valid and adequate argumentation. Such reductionism has several advantages compared to an unsystematic action, which is quite usual in current fallacy but which at least in part is due to the poor state of positive argumentation theory itself. (2) After defining 'fallacy' (3) some principle ideas and (4) the exact criteria for (argumentatively) valid and adequate arguments of the 'practical theory of argumentation' of the author are expounded. These criteria will be used as the positive basis for the following reduction. (5) In the main part of the paper a systematization, definition and explanation of the main types and many subforms of fallacies of argumentative validity and (6) adequacy is developed, following the list of positive conditions of validity and adequacy. In addition to many new types of fallacies, this systematization contains the most important of the traditionally known and named fallacies; these are explained and the criteria for some of them are corrected or put more precisely.

definition of 'fallacy' fallacies petitio principii (begging the question) practical theory of argumentation reduction of fallacy theory systematization of fallacies valid and adequate arguments 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

REFERENCES

  1. Carnap, R: 1950, Logical Foundations of Probability, 2nd revised edition, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1962.Google Scholar
  2. Eemeren, F. H. van and R. Grootendorst: 1984, Speech Acts in Argumentative Discussions. A Theoretical Model for the Analysis of Discussions Directed towards Solving Conflicts of Opinion, Foris, Dordrecht/Cinnaminson.Google Scholar
  3. Eemeren, F. H. van and R. Grootendorst: 1992, Argumentation, Communication, and Fallacies. A Pragma-Dialectical Perspective, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ/Hove/London.Google Scholar
  4. Eemeren, F. H. van and R. Grootendorst: 1995, 'The Pragma-Dialectical Approach to Fallacies', in H. V. Hansen and R. C. Pinto (eds.), Fallacies. Classical and Contemporary Readings, Pennsylvania State University Press, University Park, Pennsylvania, 130–144 (= ch. 9).Google Scholar
  5. Hamblin, Ch. L.: 1970, Fallacies, Methuen, London.Google Scholar
  6. Jacquette, D.: 1993, 'Logical Dimensions of Question-begging Argument', American Philosophical Quarterly 30, 317–327.Google Scholar
  7. Hempel, C. G.: 1965, Aspects of Scientific Explanation, The Free Press, New York.Google Scholar
  8. Johnson, R. H.: 1995, 'The Blaze of her Splendors. Suggestions about Revitalizing Fallacy Theory', in H. V. Hansen & R. C. Pinto (eds.), Fallacies. Classical and Contemporary Readings, Pennsylvania State University Press, University Park, Pennsylvania, 107–119 (= ch. 7).Google Scholar
  9. Lumer, Ch.: 1988, 'The Disputation. A Special Type of Cooperative Argumentative Dialogue', Argumentation 2, 441–464.Google Scholar
  10. Lumer, Ch.: 1990a, Praktische Argumentationstheorie. Theoretische Grundlagen, praktische Begründung und Regeln wichtiger Argumentationsarten, Vieweg, Braunschweig.Google Scholar
  11. Lumer, Ch.: 1990b, 'Argumentation, Argumentationstheorie', in H. J. Sandkühler (ed.), Europäische Enzyklopädie zu Philosophie und Wissenschaften, Vol. 1, Meiner, Hamburg, 246–255.Google Scholar
  12. Lumer, Ch.: 1991, 'Structure and Function of Argumentations. An Epistemological Approach to Determining Criteria for the Validity and Adequacy of Argumentations', in F. H. van Eemeren et al. (eds.), Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Argumentation. Organized by the International Society for the Study of Argumentation (ISSA) at the University of Amsterdam, June 19–22, 1990, Sicsat, Amsterdam, 98–107.Google Scholar
  13. Lumer, Ch.: 1992, 'Handlungstheoretisch erklärende Interpretationen als Mittel der semantischen Bedeutungsanalyse', in L. Danneberg and F. Vollhardt (eds.), Vom Umgang mit Literatur und Literaturgeschichte. Positionen und Perspektiven nach der 'Theoriedebatte', Metzler, Stuttgart, 75–113.Google Scholar
  14. Lumer, Ch.: 1995, 'Practical Arguments for Theoretical Theses', in F. H. van Eemeren et al. (eds.), Analysis and Evaluation. Proceedings of the Third ISSA Conference on Argumentation (University of Amsterdam, June 21–24, 1994),Vol. II, Sicsat, Amsterdam, 91–101. – Revised reprint: 1997, Argumentation 11, 329–340.Google Scholar
  15. McGrath, P. J.: 1995, 'When Do Deductive Arguments Beg the Question?', in F. H. van Eemeren et al. (eds.), Analysis and Evaluation. Proceedings of the Third ISSA Conference on Argumentation, Vol. II, Sic Sat, Amsterdam, 345–352.Google Scholar
  16. Siegel, H. and J. Biro: 1995, 'Epistemic Normativity, Argumentation, and Fallacies', in F. H. van Eemeren et al. (eds.), Analysis and Evaluation. Proceedings of the Third ISSA Conference on Argumentation, Vol. II, Sic Sat, Amsterdam, 286–299.Google Scholar
  17. Tindale, Ch. W.: 1995, 'Walton and the Standard Treatment', in F. H. van Eemeren et al. (eds.), Analysis and Evaluation. Proceedings of the Third ISSA Conference on Argumentation, Vol. II, Sic Sat, Amsterdam, 274–285.Google Scholar
  18. Walton, D.: 1985, 'Are Circular Arguments Necessary Vicious?', American Philosophical Quarterly 22, 263–274.Google Scholar
  19. Walton, D.: 1991, Begging the question. Circular Reasoning as a Tactic of Argumentation, Greenwood Press, New York.Google Scholar
  20. Walton, D.: 1994, 'Begging the Question as a Pragmatic Fallacy', Synthese 100, 95–131.Google Scholar
  21. Walton, D.: 1995, 'The Essential Ingredients of the Fallacy of Begging the Question', in H. V. Hansen and R. C. Pinto (eds.), Fallacies. Classical and Contemporary Readings, Pennsylvania State University Press, University Park, Pennsylvania, 229–239(= ch. 16).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christoph Lumer
    • 1
  1. 1.Universität OsnabrückOsnabrückGermany

Personalised recommendations