Argumentation May 2012

“People Who Argue Ad Hominem Are Jerks” and Other Self-Fulfilling Fallacies

Michael Veber East Carolina University
Journal
Argumentation
Published
2012-05-01
DOI
10.1007/s10503-011-9230-y
CompPile
Search in CompPile ↗
Open Access
Closed
Export
BibTeX RIS

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (0)

No articles in this index cite this work.

Cites in this index (0)

No references match articles in this index.

Also cites 8 works outside this index ↓
  1. R Fumerton (1995)
    Meta-epistemology and skepticism
     ↗
  2. CL Hamblin (1975)
    Hamblin, C.L. 1975. Saccherian arguments and the self-application of logic. Australasian Journal of Philosoph…
    Australasian Journal of Philosophy  ↗
  3. D Jacquette (1996)
    Jacquette, D. 1996. The validity paradox in Modal S5. Synthese 109: 47–62.
    Synthese  ↗
  4. D Lewis (1971)
    Lewis, D. 1971. Immodest inductive methods. Philosophy of Science 38: 54–63.
    Philosophy of Science  ↗
  5. G Nuchelmans (1992)
    Nuchelmans, G. 1992. A 17th century debate on the ‘Consequentia Mirabilis’. History and Philosophy of Logic 1…
    History and Philosophy of Logic  ↗
  6. R Robinson (1971)
    Robinson, R. 1971. Begging the question. Analysis 31: 113–117.
    Analysis  ↗
  7. R Sorensen (1991)
    Sorensen, R. 1991. P, therefore P without circularity. The Journal of Philosophy 88: 245–266.
    The Journal of Philosophy  ↗
  8. R Sorensen (1996)
    Sorensen, R. 1996. Unbeggable questions. Analysis 56: 51–55.
    Analysis  ↗
CrossRef global citation count: 0 View in citation network → Build reading path →