Talk:Argument (philosophy)

From Citizendium
(Redirected from Talk:Argument)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This article is a stub and thus not approved.
Main Article
Discussion
Related Articles  [?]
Bibliography  [?]
External Links  [?]
Citable Version  [?]
 
To learn how to update the categories for this article, see here. To update categories, edit the metadata template.
 Definition A set of statements, one of which is the conclusion, the others premises (or premisses). [d] [e]
Checklist and Archives
 Workgroup category Philosophy [Categories OK]
 Talk Archive none  English language variant Not specified

Starting this article

I have changed Larry's suggested rewording of the first paragraph only because it appeared to me to define "argument" as "good argument" (or something like it). I.e., Larry suggested a more economical and readable version that what I started with, but in so doing the result was a definition of 'argument' in which it was said that the the conclusion "is supported by" the other statements (the premises). But of course a principle aim of logic is to answer the question whether or not the premises do support the conclusion--hence my fudge by bringing in something like the "ordinary" intention that is present when premises are presented. Anyhow, this is just a start. A plan for the article includes examples of arguments, discussion of types of arguments, etc., peppered w/ links to other appropriate Citizendium content.--Joseph Bessie 21:01, 8 November 2007 (CST)

That's all right with me! Feel free to continue to tinker...choose "purported" or "intended"... --Larry Sanger 21:05, 8 November 2007 (CST)

Induction

Readers with a scientific background are apt to consider induction to mean inference from observations. Is that not worthy of a mention (it is easier to understand than the existing text)? - Nick Gardner 05:05, 6 February 2008 (CST)

That's a good point; probably some remarks on how induction is viewed differently in different disciplines is warranted (e.g., even in some contemporary composition texts, it is still stated that "Deduction goes from the general to the particular, while induction goes from the particular to the general"). Obviously, there's an important historical/philosophical connection between induction and empiricism (e.g., Hume, or 20th century positivism) that needs to be remarked on--if only by way of making reference to fuller treatments elsewhere in the wiki.--Joseph Bessie 10:23, 7 February 2008 (CST)

Continuing to "work" on the article

I am sorry that my work on this article is so painfully slow (if anyone's listening out there!). The philosophy items on my watch list (not real big) haven't been worked on for a long while--but my duties in my employment make it diffitult for me to spend the time on this that the project deserves. Still, I'll keep plugging away at adding content to at least rough out some of the article's territory, which will need improvement.--Joseph Bessie 10:45, 7 February 2008 (CST)