Appeals to Considerations
Wellman’s “conduction” and Govier’s “conductive arguments” are best described as appeals to considerations. The considerations cited are features of a subject of interest, and the conclusion is the attribution to it of a supervenient status like a classification, an evaluation, a prescription or an...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
University of Windsor
2013-05-01
|
| Series: | Informal Logic |
| Online Access: | https://ojs.uwindsor.ca/ojs/leddy/index.php/informal_logic/article/view/3894 |
| _version_ | 1818191732340162560 |
|---|---|
| author | David Hitchcock |
| author_facet | David Hitchcock |
| author_sort | David Hitchcock |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Wellman’s “conduction” and Govier’s “conductive arguments” are best described as appeals to considerations. The considerations cited are features of a subject of interest, and the conclusion is the attribution to it of a supervenient status like a classification, an evaluation, a prescription or an interpretation. The conclusion may follow either conclusively or non-conclusively or not at all. Weighing the pros and cons is only one way of judging whether the conclusion follows. Further, the move from in-formation about the subject’s cited features to the attribution of a supervenient status is often but one moment in a more complex process. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-12T00:19:17Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-5117583b9b2344c7b707e4f7a8f83516 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 0824-2577 0824-2577 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-12T00:19:17Z |
| publishDate | 2013-05-01 |
| publisher | University of Windsor |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Informal Logic |
| spelling | doaj.art-5117583b9b2344c7b707e4f7a8f835162022-12-22T00:44:46ZengUniversity of WindsorInformal Logic0824-25770824-25772013-05-0133219523710.22329/il.v33i2.38943180Appeals to ConsiderationsDavid Hitchcock0McMaster UniversityWellman’s “conduction” and Govier’s “conductive arguments” are best described as appeals to considerations. The considerations cited are features of a subject of interest, and the conclusion is the attribution to it of a supervenient status like a classification, an evaluation, a prescription or an interpretation. The conclusion may follow either conclusively or non-conclusively or not at all. Weighing the pros and cons is only one way of judging whether the conclusion follows. Further, the move from in-formation about the subject’s cited features to the attribution of a supervenient status is often but one moment in a more complex process.https://ojs.uwindsor.ca/ojs/leddy/index.php/informal_logic/article/view/3894 |
| spellingShingle | David Hitchcock Appeals to Considerations Informal Logic |
| title | Appeals to Considerations |
| title_full | Appeals to Considerations |
| title_fullStr | Appeals to Considerations |
| title_full_unstemmed | Appeals to Considerations |
| title_short | Appeals to Considerations |
| title_sort | appeals to considerations |
| url | https://ojs.uwindsor.ca/ojs/leddy/index.php/informal_logic/article/view/3894 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT davidhitchcock appealstoconsiderations |