Abductive, presumptive and plausible arguments
Current practice in logic increasingly accords recognition to abductive, presumptive or plausible arguments, in addition to deductive and inductive arguments. But there is uncertainty about what these terms exactly mean, what the differences between them are (if any), and how they relate. By examini...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
University of Windsor
2001-01-01
|
| Series: | Informal Logic |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://informallogic.ca/index.php/informal_logic/article/view/2241 |
| _version_ | 1811222372675485696 |
|---|---|
| author | Douglas Walton |
| author_facet | Douglas Walton |
| author_sort | Douglas Walton |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Current practice in logic increasingly accords recognition to abductive, presumptive or plausible arguments, in addition to deductive and inductive arguments. But there is uncertainty about what these terms exactly mean, what the differences between them are (if any), and how they relate. By examining some analyses ofthese terms and some of the history of the subject (including the views of Peirce and Cameades), this paper sets out considerations leading to a set of definitions, discusses the relationship of these three forms of argument to argumentation schemes and sets out a new argumentation scheme for abductive argument. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-12T08:14:41Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-a8c7f6dee740493d8924f2074d7ca808 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 0824-2577 2293-734X |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-12T08:14:41Z |
| publishDate | 2001-01-01 |
| publisher | University of Windsor |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Informal Logic |
| spelling | doaj.art-a8c7f6dee740493d8924f2074d7ca8082022-12-22T03:40:51ZengUniversity of WindsorInformal Logic0824-25772293-734X2001-01-0121210.22329/il.v21i2.2241Abductive, presumptive and plausible argumentsDouglas WaltonCurrent practice in logic increasingly accords recognition to abductive, presumptive or plausible arguments, in addition to deductive and inductive arguments. But there is uncertainty about what these terms exactly mean, what the differences between them are (if any), and how they relate. By examining some analyses ofthese terms and some of the history of the subject (including the views of Peirce and Cameades), this paper sets out considerations leading to a set of definitions, discusses the relationship of these three forms of argument to argumentation schemes and sets out a new argumentation scheme for abductive argument.https://informallogic.ca/index.php/informal_logic/article/view/2241argumentation schemeinference to the best explanationdefeasible argumentscientific evidencelegal evidencehypothesis |
| spellingShingle | Douglas Walton Abductive, presumptive and plausible arguments Informal Logic argumentation scheme inference to the best explanation defeasible argument scientific evidence legal evidence hypothesis |
| title | Abductive, presumptive and plausible arguments |
| title_full | Abductive, presumptive and plausible arguments |
| title_fullStr | Abductive, presumptive and plausible arguments |
| title_full_unstemmed | Abductive, presumptive and plausible arguments |
| title_short | Abductive, presumptive and plausible arguments |
| title_sort | abductive presumptive and plausible arguments |
| topic | argumentation scheme inference to the best explanation defeasible argument scientific evidence legal evidence hypothesis |
| url | https://informallogic.ca/index.php/informal_logic/article/view/2241 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT douglaswalton abductivepresumptiveandplausiblearguments |