Argumentation Dec 2022 Open Access

An Unconscious Universal in the Mind is Like an Immaterial Dinner in the Stomach. A Debate on Logical Generalism (1914–1919)

Hubert Marraud Universidad Autónoma de Madrid

Abstract

AbstractThe debate on the a fortiori and the universal that took place between April 1914 and April 1919 in the journal Mind has a double interest for argumentation theorists. First, the discussion is an example of a philosophical polylogue that exhibits the characteristics of a quasi-engaged dialogue (Blair Blair, J. A. (2012 [1998]). “The Limits of the Dialogue Model of Argument”. Argumentation 12, pp. 325–339. Reprinted in J.A. Blair, Groundwork in the Theory of Argumentation, pp. 231–244. Dordrecht: Springer, 2012.), confirming Blair’s hypothesis that journal papers and scholarly monographs can be analyzed as turns in non-engaged or quasi-engaged dialogues. It could be said that philosophical argumentation is dialectical but not dialogical. Second, the debate is a discussion in argumentation theory. Generalism in the theory of argument claims that the very possibility of arguing depends on a suitable supply of general rules that specify what kinds of conclusions can be drawn from what kinds of data, while particularism denies this. Although the terminology may be alien, I will also show that the debate on the a fortiori and the universal was a debate on generalism and particularism.

Journal
Argumentation
Published
2022-12-01
DOI
10.1007/s10503-022-09580-8
CompPile
Open Access
OA PDF Hybrid
Topics
argument
Export
BibTeX RIS

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (1)

  1. Alhambra (2023)
    A Particularist Approach to Arguments by Analogy
    Argumentation

References (38) · 2 in this index

  1. Lewiński et al. (2014)
    Argumentative Polylogues in a Dialectical Framework: A Methodological Inquiry
    Argumentation
  2. J. A. Blair (2012)
    Groundwork in the theory of argumentation
     ↗
  3. Coffey, P. (1938 [1912]). The science of logic, 2 New York: Peter Smith
  4. J Dancy (2004)
    Ethics without principles
     ↗
  5. C Dutilh Novaes (2021)
    The dialogical roots of deduction
Show all 38 →
  1. G Harman (1996)
    Moral relativism and moral objectivity
  2. WS Jevons (1884)
    Studies in deductive logic
  3. C Kerbrat-Orecchioni (2004)
    Kerbrat-Orecchioni, C. 2004. Introducing Polylogue. Journal of Pragmatics 36: 1–24.
    Journal of Pragmatics  ↗
  4. JN Keynes (1884)
    Studies and exercises in formal logic
  5. F Leal (2022)
    How philosophers argue. An adversarial collaboration on the Russell-Copleston debate
     ↗
  6. H Marraud (2021)
    Marraud, H. 2021b. Holismo y atomismo en teoría de los argumentos. Diálogo Filosófico 111: 401–418.
    Diálogo Filosófico
  7. Marraud, H. (2021a). Cuatro modelos de argumento. Quadripartita Ratio 6(11), 17–40. http://www.quadripartitar…
  8. E Mayo (1915)
    Mayo, E. 1915. The limits of logical validity. Mind 24 (93): 70–74.
    Mind  ↗
  9. CA Mercier (1912)
    A New Logic
  10. CA Mercier (1914)
    Mercier, C.A. 1914a. Is inversion a valid inference? Mind 23 (90): 248–250.
    Mind  ↗
  11. CA Mercier (1914)
    Mercier, C.A. 1914b. Dr. Mercier and the logicians. Mind 23 (92): 564–567.
    Mind  ↗
  12. CA Mercier (1915)
    Mercier, C.A. 1915. The necessity for a universal in reasoning. Mind 24 (95): 386–396.
    Mind  ↗
  13. CA Mercier (1916)
    Mercier, C.A. 1916. The Universal and the a fortiori. Mind 25 (97): 83–93.
    Mind  ↗
  14. CA Mercier (1917)
    Mercier, C.A. 1917. The argument a fortiori. Mind 26 (103): 340–350.
    Mind  ↗
  15. De Morgan, A. (1847). Formal Logic. The Calculus of Inference, Necessary and Probable. London: Taylor and Wal…
  16. WA Pickard-Cambridge (1915)
    Pickard-Cambridge, W.A. 1915. The a fortiori argument. Mind 24 (96): 536–538.
    Mind  ↗
  17. WA Pickard-Cambridge (1917)
    Pickard-Cambridge, W.A. 1917. Universals and a fortiori reasoning. Mind 26 (102): 205–215.
    Mind  ↗
  18. FCS Schiller (1914)
    Schiller, F.C.S. 1914. Dr. Mercier and formal Logic. Mind 23 (92): 568–569.
    Mind  ↗
  19. FCS Schiller (1916)
    Schiller, F.C.S. 1916. The argument a fortiori. The Argument a Fortiori. Mind 25 (100): 513–517.
    The Argument a Fortiori. Mind
  20. FCS Schiller (1917)
    Schiller, F.C.S. 1917. Formalism and the a fortiori. Mind 26 (104): 458–465.
    Mind  ↗
  21. FCS Schiller (1918)
    Schiller, F.C.S. 1918. Formalism and the a fortiori. Mind 27 (106): 198–202.
    Mind  ↗
  22. FCS Schiller (1919)
    Schiller, F.C.S. 1919. Logic and formalism. Mind 28 (110): 213–216.
    Mind  ↗
  23. HS Shelton (1914)
    Shelton, H.S. 1914. Dr. Mercier and the Logicians. Mind 23 (91): 402–404.
    Mind  ↗
  24. HS Shelton (1915)
    Shelton, H.S. 1915a. The opponents of formal logic. Mind 24 (93): 75–79.
    Mind  ↗
  25. HS Shelton (1915)
    Shelton, H.S. 1915b. The necessity for a universal in reasoning. Mind 96: 525–531.
    Mind  ↗
  26. HS Shelton (1917)
    Shelton, H.S. 1917. The necessity of a universal in reasoning. Mind 26 (103): 351–356.
    Mind  ↗
  27. HS Shelton (1918)
    Shelton, H.S. 1918. Logic and formalism. Mind 27 (108): 464–471.
    Mind  ↗
  28. A. Sidgwick (1916)
    Sidgwick, Alfred. 1916. The a fortiori argument. Mind 25 (100): 518–521.
    Mind  ↗
  29. Toulmin, S.E. (2003 [1958]). The uses of argument. Updated edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     ↗
  30. JE Turner (1917)
    Turner, J.E. 1917. The philosophical basis of the a fortiori. Mind 26 (101): 71–76.
    Mind  ↗
  31. L Vega Reñón (2011)
    Compendio de lógica, argumentación y retórica
  32. Walton (2000)
    File of Fallacies: Alfred Sidgwick: A Little-Known Precursor of Informal Logic …
    Argumentation
  33. Douglas N Walton (1995)
    Commitment in dialogue: Basic concepts of interpersonal reasoning
CrossRef global citation count: 1 View in citation network → Build reading path →

Related Articles

  1. Argumentation Apr 2026
    A Normative Pragmatic Inquiry into the Volatility of Norms in Argumentation ↗
    Sally Jackson
    discourse analysis argument qualitative research public rhetoric
  2. Business and Professional Communication Quarterly Apr 2026
    Book Review: Environmental Preservation and the Grey Cliffs Conflict: Negotiating Common Narratives, Values, and Ethos PickeringK. (2024). Environmental Preservation and the Grey Cliffs Conflict: Negotiating Common Narratives, Values, and Ethos. Utah State University Press, 268 pp. ↗
    Mia Twomey
    argument book reviews
  3. Res Rhetorica Apr 2026
    Logos in ancient Greek discourse on rhetoric: An overview ↗
    Arkadiusz Sokolnicki
    classical rhetoric rhetorical criticism discourse analysis argument
  4. Assessing Writing Apr 2026
    Associations of adolescents’ argumentative writing scores and growth when evaluated by different human raters and artificial intelligence models ↗
    Deborah K. Reed; Sterett Mercer
    argument artificial intelligence
  5. Rhetoric of Health and Medicine Apr 2026
    Psyche or Soma?: An Analysis of the Medical Debates Over the Diagnosis and Treatment of “Transsexualism” ↗
    Samantha Rippetoe
    rhetorical criticism argument archival research