Advertisement

Argumentation

, Volume 11, Issue 3, pp 341–354 | Cite as

Fallacies, Blunders, and Dialogue Shifts: Walton‘s Contributions to the Fallacy Debate

  • Christopher W. TINDALE
Article

Abstract

The paper examines Walton‘s concept of fallacy as it develops throughthree stages of his work: from the early series of papers co-authored withJohn Woods; through a second phase of involvement with thepragma-dialectical perspective; and on to the final phase in which heoffers a distinct pragmatic theory that reaches beyond the perceived limitsof the pragma-dialectical account while still exhibiting a debt to thatperspective and the early investigations with Woods. It is observed how Walton‘s model of fallacy is established in distinction to its competitors,and its various problems and successes are discussed.

Dialogue shifts fallacy fallacy theory formal fallacies informal fallacies pragma-dialectics pragmatic theory 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

REFERENCES

  1. Eemeren, Frans H. van: 1988, ‘Argumentation Analysis: A Dutch Counter-balance’, in Alec Fisher (ed.), Critical Thinking: Proceedings of the First British Conference on Informal Logic and Critical Thinking, University of East Anglia, pp. 39–53.Google Scholar
  2. Eemeren, Frans H. van and Rob Grootendorst: 1984, Speech Acts in Argumentative Discussions, Foris Publications, Dordrecht-Holland.Google Scholar
  3. Eemeren, Frans H. van and Rob Grootendorst: 1992, Argumentation, Communication, and Fallacies: A Pragma-Dialectical Perspective, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers, Hillsdale, N.J.Google Scholar
  4. Eemeren, Frans H. van and Rob Grootendorst: 1987, ‘Fallacies in a Pragma-Dialectical Perspective’, Argumentation 1, 283–301.Google Scholar
  5. Eemeren, Frans H. van and Rob Grootendorst: 1988, ‘Rationale for a Pragma-Dialectical Perspective’, Argumentation 2, 271–291.Google Scholar
  6. Eemeren, Frans H. van and Rob Grootendorst: 1989, ‘A Transition Stage in the Theory of Fallacies’, Journal of Pragmatics 13, 99–109.Google Scholar
  7. Eemeren, Frans H. van, Rob Grootendorst and Francisca Snoeck Henkemans: 1996, Fundamentals of Argumentation Theory: A Handbook of Historical Backgrounds and Contemporary Developments, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers, Mahwah, New Jersey.Google Scholar
  8. Finocchiiaro, Maurice A.: 1980, Galileo and the Art of Reasoning: Rhetorical Foundations of Logic and Scientific Method, D. Reidel Publishing Co., Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  9. Grootendorst, Rob: 1985, ‘Response’, in J. Robert Cox, Malcom O. Sillars and Gregg B. Walker (eds.), Argument and Social Practice: Proceedings of the Fourth SCA/AFA Conference on Argumentation, Speech Communication Association, Annandale, VA, pp. 159–161.Google Scholar
  10. Grootendorst, Rob: 1987, ‘Some Fallacies about Fallacies’, in Frans H. van Emeren, Rob Grootendorst, J. Anthony Blair and Charles A. Willard (eds.), Argumentation: Across the Lines of Discipline, Foris Publications, Dordrecht/Holland, pp. 331–341.Google Scholar
  11. Hamblin, C. L.: 1970, Fallacies, Methuen & Co., London.Google Scholar
  12. Johnson, Ralph H.: 1990, ‘Hamblin on the Standard Treatment’, Philosophy and Rhetoric 23, 153–167.Google Scholar
  13. Johnson, Ralph H.: 1996, The Rise of Informal Logic: Essays on Argumentation, Critical Thinking, Reasoning and Politics, Vale Press, Newport News, Virginia.Google Scholar
  14. Walton, Douglas: 1987, Informal Fallacies: Towards a Theory of Argument Criticisms, John Benjamins, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  15. Walton, Douglas: 1989, Informal Logic: A Handbook for Critical Argumentation, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  16. Walton, Douglas: 1991a, Begging the Question: Circular Reasoning as a Tactic of Argumentation, Greenwood Press, New York.Google Scholar
  17. Walton, Douglas: 1991b, ‘Hamblin and the Standard Treatment of Fallacies’, Philosophy and Rhetoric 24, 353–361.Google Scholar
  18. Walton, Douglas: 1992, Plausible Argument in Everyday Conversation, State University of New York, New York.Google Scholar
  19. Walton, Douglas: 1995, A Pragmatic Theory of Fallacy, The University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa.Google Scholar
  20. Walton, Douglas: 1996, Arguments from Ignorance, The Pennsylvania State University Press, University Park, Pennsylvannia.Google Scholar
  21. Walton, Douglas and Erik C. W. Krabbe: 1995, Commitment in Dialogue: Basic Concepts of Interpersonal Reasoning, State University of New York, New York.Google Scholar
  22. Woods, John: 1980, ‘What is Informal Logic?’ in Blair J. Anthony and Ralph H. Johnson (eds.), Informal Logic: The First International Symposium, Edgepress, Pt. Reyes, CA.Google Scholar
  23. Woods, John: 1988, ‘Pragma-dialectics: A Radical Departure in Fallacy Theory’, ISSA Newsletter 4, 5–15.Google Scholar
  24. Woods, John and Douglas Walton: 1982, Argument: The Logic of the Fallacies, McGraw-Hill Ryerson, Toronto.Google Scholar
  25. Woods, John and Douglas Walton: 1989, Fallacies: Selected Papers 1972–1982, Foris Publications, Dordrecht/Holland.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christopher W. TINDALE
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Philosophy, Catharine Parr Traill CollegeTrent UniversityPeterboroughCanada

Personalised recommendations