Windsor Studies in Argumentation

The Douglas Walton Reader

Catherine Hundleby — 2024-10-24

This book is a product of the Walton Reader project, which introduces students to Walton’s ideas. The Centre for Research in Reasoning, Argumentation and Rhetoric (CRRAR) and the PhD in Argumentation Studies from University of Windsor thought of carrying out a project that would introduce students to the work of Walton published in the Informal Logic journal. This book provides an overview of Walton's scholarship in informal logic. It includes papers on fallacies, argument evaluation, dialogues, and argumentation schemes. This Reader adds to the special issue of Informal Logic Vol, 42, No. 1 (2022) in the University of Windsor’s effort to remember and acknowledge the impact of Walton’s work in argumentation studies.

The Epistemology of Rhetoric

Erik Bengtson — 2024-02-08

In The Epistemology of Rhetoric: Plato, Doxa, and Post-Truth, Erik Bengtson sets out to formulate a contemporary epistemology of rhetoric considering the prevailing post-truth condition. In pursuit of this objective, Bengtson challenges dominant myths surrounding Plato's influence on rhetoric and examines the contemporary scholarly discourse on doxa, shedding light on its various facets. He also introduces the concepts of sedimentation and erosion as tools for comprehending the protracted nature of argumentation on foundational issues. This work not only advances our comprehension of rhetoric in the context of the post-truth era. It also invites readers to reconsider established perspectives, offering fresh insights into the dynamics of argumentation
over time.

Rhetorical Argumentation

Christian Kock — 2023-07-05

Aristotle taught us that rhetoric is centered around deliberation, and he emphasized that we may only deliberate about things that we can in fact undertake (Rhetoric, 1357a, and elsewhere, mainly in the ethical works). Rhetorical argumentation is, in its essence, the bedrock of such deliberation: It provides the reasons for and against various choices, which we exchange when, in some human collective, we are to decide on a course of action. To be sure, not all rhetoric is argumentation. But all deliberative discourse uses rhetoric, and in such discourse rhetorical argumentation is central (and should be, we might add). Hence, we have found it in place to present a collection of work that revolves around the conception of rhetorical argumentation just outlined and asserts the centrality of that notion in any theory of argumentation.

Critical Thinking Education and Assessment, 2nd ed.

Jan Sobocan — 2022-08-05

This second edition of CRITICAL THINKING EDUCATION AND ASSESSMENT: Can Higher Order Thinking be Tested? contains a series of important papers from the first edition and a new Introduction by Jan Sobocan. The essays are an important read for anyone interested in the issues raised by the teaching of critical thinking and consequent attempts to test its success. They discuss attempts to use testing to ensure educational accountability, the politics of testing regimes, and the shortcomings and the strengths of standard tests used to teach and assess students, courses, programs, and the tests themselves. The ebook can serve as a useful introduction to the questions that this raises, at the same time that it provides answers to these questions from the perspective of many different trends within contemporary argumentation theory.

This anthology’s contributors include many leading figures in the fields of informal logic, critical thinking, testing, argumentation theory, and educational theory: Carol Ann Giancarlo, Leo Groarke, Ralph H. Johnson, Robert H. Ennis, William Hare, Jan Sobocan, Roland Case, Gerald Nosich, Donald L. Hatcher, Frans H. van Eemeren, Bart Garssen, J. Anthony Blair, Linda Kaser, and Sharon Murphy.

Definition

David Hitchcock — 2021-07-12

This book proposes guidelines for constructing and evaluating definitions of terms, i.e. words or phrases of general application. The guidelines extend to adoption of nomenclature. The book is meant to be a practical guide for people who find themselves in their daily lives or their employment producing or evaluating definitions of terms. It can be consulted rather than being read through. The book’s theoretical framework is a distinction, due to Robert H. Ennis, of three dimensions of definitions: the act of the definer, the content of the definition, and its form. The act of a definer is what the definer does in defining a term; the book distinguishes, following Ennis, three basic acts of defining: reporting, stipulating, and advocating. The content of a definition is in one sense the information that the definition conveys and in another sense the words in its defining part. The form of a definition is the way it is expressed, for example as a definition by genus and differentia.

Studies in Critical Thinking

J. Anthony Blair — 2021-01-01

Critical thinking deserves both imaginative teaching and serious theoretical attention. Studies in Critical Thinking assembles an all-star cast to serve both.

EDITOR: J. Anthony Blair (Windsor)

INTRO: On What Critical Thinking Is (Alec Fisher, East Anglia)

PART II On Teaching CT (Blair & Scriven) 5 Exercises: Validity (Derek Allen, Toronto), Teaching Argument Construction (Kingsbury, Waikato), C.T About Students’ Own Beliefs (Tracy Bowell, Waikato & Justine Kingsbury), Settling Conflict by Compromise (Jan Albert van Laar, Groningen), Using Arguments to Inquire (Sharon Bailin, Simon Fraser & Mark Battersby, Capilano)

PART III 7 Chapters on Argument: Arguments and CT (J. Anthony Blair), The Concept of an Argument (David Hitchcock, McMaster), Using Computer Aided Argument Mapping to Teach CT (Martin Davies, Ashley Barnett, Tim van Gelder, Melbourne), Argument Schemes and Argument Mining (Douglas Walton, Windsor), Constructing Effective Arguments (Beth Innocenti, Kansas), Judging Arguments (Blair), Introduction to Fallaciousness (Christopher Tindale, Windsor).

PART IV 7 Chapters on Useful Background for CT: How a Critical Thinkeer Uses the Web (Sally Jackson, Illinois at Urbana-Champaign), Definition (Robert Ennis, Illinois at Urbana-Champaign), Generalizing (Dale Hample & Yiwen Dai, Maryland), Appeals to Authorit8y: Sources & Experts (Mark Battersby), Logic and CT, (G.C. Goddu, Richmond), Abduction and Inference to the Best Explanation (John Woods, British Columbia). The Unruly Logic of Evaluation (Michael Scriven, Claremont)

Rigour and Reason

J. Anthony Blair — 2020-06-04

Built in the centre of Copenhagen, and noted for its equestrian stairway, the Rundetaarn (Round Tower), was intended as an astronomical observatory. Part of a complex of buildings that once included a university library, it affords expansive views of the city in every direction, towering above what surrounds it. The metaphor of the towering figure, who sees what others might not, whose vantage point allows him to visualize how things fit together, and who has an earned-stature of respect and authority, fits another Danish stalwart, Hans Vilhelm Hansen, whose contributions to the fields of informal logic and argument theory have earned the gratitude of his colleagues, and inspired this collection of essays, written to express the appreciation of its authors and of the many, many colleagues they represent.

Informal Logic

Federico Puppo — 2019-10-22

The informal logic movement began as an attempt to develop – and teach – an alternative logic which can account for the real life arguing that surrounds us in our daily lives – in newspapers and the popular media, political and social commentary, advertising, and interpersonal exchange. The movement was rooted in research and discussion in Canada and especially at the University of Windsor, and has become a branch of argumentation theory which intersects with related traditions and approaches (notably formal logic, rhetoric and dialectics in the form of pragma-dialectics). In this volume, some of the best known contributors to the movement discuss their views and the reasoning and argument which is informal logic’s subject matter. Many themes and issues are explored in a way that will fuel the continued evolution of the field. Federico Puppo adds an insightful essay which considers the origins and development of informal logic and whether informal logicians are properly described as a “school” of thought. In considering that proposition, Puppo introduces readers to a diverse range of essays, some of them previously published, others written specifically for this volume.

Inquiry: A New Paradigm for Critical Thinking

Mark Battersby — 2018-12-05

This volume reflects the development and theoretical foundation of a new paradigm for critical thinking based on inquiry. The field of critical thinking, as manifested in the Informal Logic movement, developed primarily as a response to the inadequacies of formalism to represent actual argumentative practice and to provide useful argumentative skills to students. Because of this, the primary focus of the field has been on informal arguments rather than formal reasoning. Yet the formalist history of the field is still evident in its emphasis, with respect to both theory and pedagogy, on the structure and evaluation of individual, de-contextualized arguments. It is our view that such a view of critical thinking is excessively narrow and limited, failing to provide an understanding of argumentation as largely a matter of comparative evaluation of a variety of contending positions and arguments with the goal of reaching a reasoned judgment on an issue. As a consequence, traditional critical thinking instruction is problematic in failing to provide the reasoning skills that students need in order to accomplish this goal. Instead, the goal of critical thinking instruction has been seen largely as a defensive one: of learning to not fall prey to invalid, inadequate, or fallacious arguments.

The cover image for this volume is available from the United States Library of Congress's Prints and Photographs division under the digital ID pplot.13725. It is part of the public domain and is available here.

Problems in Argument Analysis and Evaluation

Trudy Govier — 2018-06-22

We are pleased to publish this WSIA edition of Trudy’s Govier’s seminal volume, Problems in Argument Analysis and Evaluation. Originally published in 1987 by Foris Publications, this was a pioneering work that played a major role in establishing argumentation theory as a discipline. Today, it is as relevant to the field as when it first appeared, with discussions of questions and issues that remain central to the study of argument. It has defined the main approaches to many of those issues and guided the ways in which we might respond to them. From this foundation, it sets the stage for further investigations and emerging research.

This is a second edition of the book that is corrected and updated by the author, with new prefaces to each chapter.

Deliberative Rhetoric

Christian Kock — 2017-11-09

Christian Kock’s essays show the essential interconnectedness of practical reasoning, rhetoric and deliberative democracy. They constitute a unique contribution to argumentation theory that draws on – and criticizes – the work of philosophers, rhetoricians, political scientists and other argumentation theorists. It puts rhetoric in the service of modern democracies by drawing attention to the obligations of politicians to articulate arguments and objections that citizens can weigh against each other in their deliberations about possible courses of action.

Reasonable Responses

Catherine E. Hundleby — 2017-11-09

This tribute to the breadth and influence of Trudy Govier’s philosophical work begins with her early scholarship in argumentation theory, paying special attention to its pedagogical expression. Most people first encounter Trudy Govier’s work and many people only encounter it through her textbooks, especially A Practical Study of Argument, published in many editions. In addition to the work on argumentation that has continued throughout her career, much of Govier’s later work addresses social philosophy and the problems of trust and response to moral wrongs. The introduction by Catherine Hundleby situates Govier’s research along the path of her unusual academic life.

While following the timeline of Govier’s research publication, in this collection the authors build on her work and suggest certain new connections between her argumentation theory and social philosophy. A Practical Study of Argument, first published in 1985, situates Govier among a distinct segment of informal logicians whose concerns about teaching reasoning to post-secondary students orient their research, Takuzo Konishi argues. Moira Kloster evaluates Govier’s progress in the challenge of providing critical thinking education to diverse and changing social contexts. Shifting gears to social philosophy but still addressing education, Laura Elizabeth Pinto explores the significance of Govier’s work on trust for explaining the problem of “audit culture” for teaching. At the centre of this volume, social philosophy receives an abstract meta-ethical defense from Linda Radzik.

Moving solidly into the domain of normative social philosophy, Alice MacLachlan reconsiders Govier’s condemnation of revenge by viewing it as a form of moral address, but she notes how revenge as an act of communication contrasts with argumentation in lacking the respect that Govier maintains is intrinsic to argumentation. MacLachlan ultimately agrees that revenge is morally indefensible. The practical challenges of addressing others in the aftermath of wrongdoing, especially in public contexts, can make it difficult to distinguish between victims and combatants or wrongdoers, Alistair Little and Wilhelm Verwoerd explain, and Kathryn Norlock argues that forgiveness is psychologically vexed too. People may recognize transformation to be in principle possible for all people, Norlock argues, and yet we may find the evidence regarding some particular evildoer sufficient to count that person as an exception. Finally Govier responds to the various papers.

Dialogues in Argumentation

Ron Von Burg — 2016-11-03

This volume focuses on dialogue and argumentation in contexts which are marked by truculence and discord. The contributors include well known argumentation scholars who discuss the issues this raises from the point of view of a variety of disciplines and points of view. The authors seek to address theoretically challenging issues in a way that is relevant to both the theory and the practice of argument. The collection brings together selected essays from the 2006 11^th Wake Forest University Biennial Argumentation Conference held at Florida Atlantic University in Boca Raton, Florida and the 2012 14^th Wake Forest University Biennial Argumentation Conference held at Casa Artom in Venice, Italy.

The Rise of Informal Logic

Ralph H. Johnson — 2014-08-15

We are pleased to release this digital edition of Ralph Johnson’s The Rise of Informal Logic as Volume 2 in the series Windsor Studies in Argumentation. This edition is a reprint of the previous Vale Press edition with some minor corrections.

We have decided to make this the second volume in the series because it is such a compelling account of the formation of informal logic as a discipline, written by one of the founders of the field. The book includes essential chapters on the history and development of informal logic. Other chapters are key reflections on the theoretical issues raised by the attempt to understand informal argument. Many of the papers were previously published in important journals. A number of them were co-authored with J. Anthony Blair. Three of them have appeared only in the present book.

What Do We Know About the World?

Gabrijela Kišiček — 2013-10-03

Order a print copy from Amazon

What do we know about the world? Rhetorical and Argumentative Perspectives is a book trying to answer the title question by contributing to rhetorical and argumentative studies. It consists of papers presented at the “First International Conference on Rhetoric in Croatia: the Days of Ivo Škarić” in May, 2012, and subsequently revised for publication. Through a variety of different routs, the papers explore the role of rhetoric and argumentation in various types of public discourse and present interdisciplinary work connecting linguists, phoneticians, philosophers, law experts and communication scientists in the common ground of rhetoric and argumentation.. The Conference was organized with the intent of paying respect to the Croatian rhetorician and professor emeritus Ivo Škarić who was the first to introduce rhetoric at the Department of Phonetics at the Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Zagreb.