Skip to main content

Against Making the Linked-Convergent Distinction

  • Chapter
Pondering on Problems of Argumentation

Part of the book series: Argumentation Library ((ARGA,volume 14))

The intuition guiding the avowed distinction between linked and convergent argument structures is easy enough to grasp – in various arguments some of the premises appear to link together to form a single reason for the conclusion, while other premises appear to constitute separate reasons which independently converge on the conclusion. Though the intuition is easy enough to grasp, as James Freeman has recently pointed out: “the problem of clearly distinguishing linked from convergent argument structure has proven vexing” (Freeman, 2001, p. 397). Indeed, the question remains whether the intuition truly captures a real distinction.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Bassham, G. (2003). Linked and independent premises: A new analysis. In F. H. van Eemeren, J. A. Blair, Ch. A. Willard, & A. F. Snoeck Henkemans (Eds.), Proceedings of The Fifth Conference of the International Society for The Study of Argumentation (pp. 69–73). Amsterdam:Sic Sat.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, J. B. (2001). Argument structure and disciplinary perspective. Argumentation, 15(4), 397–423.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goddu, G. C. (2007). Walton on argument structure. Informal Logic, 27(1), 5–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goddu, G. C. (2003). Against the “Ordinary Summing” test for convergence. Informal Logic, 23(3), 215–236.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, S. N. (1986). Practical Reasoning in Natural Language. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vorobej, M. (2006). A Theory of Argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walton, D. (1996). Argument Structure: A Pragmatic Theory. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yanal, R. J. (2003). Linked and convergent reasons—again. In J. A. Blair, D. Farr, H. V. Hansen, R. H. Johnson, & C. W. Tindale (Eds.), Informal Logic at 25: Proceedings of the Windsor Conference [CD-ROM], Windsor, ON: OSSA.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2009 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Goddu, G.C. (2009). Against Making the Linked-Convergent Distinction. In: van Eemeren, F.H., Garssen, B. (eds) Pondering on Problems of Argumentation. Argumentation Library, vol 14. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-9165-0_13

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics