Abstract
In the present chapter, I consider a further objection to the WoodsWalton Approach made by pragma-dialecticians. The complaint is that in the Woods-Walton Approach there is no hint of an underylying theoretical unity.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
There are welcome exceptions, of course. Philosophy and Rhetoric, Argumentation and Informal Logic stand out for their receptiveness to work in fallacy theory. There are recent indications that good academic presses are also lightening up, as evidenced by [Hansen and Pinto, 1994], and [Walton, 1992], not to overlook [Johnson, 1996].
I shall not contrive a defence of WW’s formalisms beyond those offered by [Woods and Walton, 1989, ch. 17], [van Eemeren et al., 1996, ch. 8] and chapters 2 and 3 of this book. Responses to the unification challenge can also be found in chapter 1.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2004 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Woods, J. (2004). Unifying the Fallacies?. In: The Death of Argument. Applied Logic Series, vol 32. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-2712-3_11
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-2712-3_11
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-90-481-6700-5
Online ISBN: 978-1-4020-2712-3
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive