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

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

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.

  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 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

TINDALE, C.W. Fallacies, Blunders, and Dialogue Shifts: Walton‘s Contributions to the Fallacy Debate. Argumentation 11, 341–354 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007706724732

Download citation

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