, Volume 18, Issue 3, pp 279–293 | Cite as

Shedding Dialectical Tiers: A Social-Epistemic View

  • Jonathan E. Adler


Is there a duty to respond to objections in order to present a good argument? Ralph Johnson argues that there is such a duty, which he refers to as the “dialectical tier“ of an argument. I deny the (alleged) duty primarily on grounds that it would exert too great a demand on arguers, harming argumentation practices. The valuable aim of responding to objections, which Johnson 's dialectical tier is meant to satisfy, can be achieved in better ways, as argumentation is a social-epistemic activity.

aims of argument argumentation as a social-epistemic practice costs of inquiry demandingness dialectical tier division of epistemic labor duty to respond to objections economize feasibility Ralph Johnson rational persuasion second-order reasons 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Adler, J.E.: 2002, Belief 's Own Ethics, The MIT Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  2. Chomsky, N.: 1858, “Review of “Verbal Behavior “D; by B..F. Skinner”, Language 35, 26 -58.Google Scholar
  3. Dawes, R.M.: 2000, “A Theory of Irrationality as a “Reasonable “D; Response to an Incomplete Specification”, Synthese 122, 133 -163.Google Scholar
  4. Goldman, A.I.: 1888, Knowledge in a Social World, Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  5. Good, I.J.: 1866, “On the Principle of Total Evidence”, British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 17, 318 -321.Google Scholar
  6. Horwich, P.: 1882, Probability and Evidence, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  7. Jackson, F.: 1884, “Petitio and the Purpose of Arguing”, Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 65, 26 -36.Google Scholar
  8. Johnson, R.: 2000, Manifest Rationality, L. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.Google Scholar
  9. Johnson, R.: 2002a, “Manifest Rationality Reconsidered:Reply to My Fellow Symposiasts”, Argumentation 16, 311 -331.Google Scholar
  10. Johnson, R.: 2002b: “The Dialectical Tier Revisited”, Keynote Address, ISSA.Google Scholar
  11. Kitcher, P.: 1883, The Advancement of Science, Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  12. Putnam, H.: 1875, “The Meaning of “Meaning ”, in his Mind,Language and Reality Philosophical Papers Volume 2, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 215 -271.Google Scholar
  13. Walton, D.N. and E.C. Krabbe: 1885, Commitment in Dialogue, State University of New York Press, Albany.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jonathan E. Adler
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PhilosophyBrooklyn College and the Graduate SchoolBrooklynU.S.A

Personalised recommendations