Farewell to Fallacies (and Welcome Back!)

Philosophy & Rhetoric Dec 2021

Farewell to Fallacies (and Welcome Back!)

Eugen Popa

Abstract

ABSTRACT Fallacies are traditionally defined as potentially deceptive failures of rationality or reasonableness. Fallacy theories seek to model this failure by formulating standards of rationality or reasonableness that arguers must observe when engaging in argumentative interaction. Yet it remains relatively easy to reject or avoid fallacy judgments even in the most clear-cut cases. In this article, I argue for a pluralist approach to criticism in which the fallacy accusation is only the starting point for a more complex form of criticism. In a pluralist approach, the identification of fallacies works as a first step precisely because it can be so easily set aside. In doing so, the evaluator seeks other evaluative angles that depart from the original one. As a case in point, I exemplify the approach on a piece of argumentative discourse in the scientific context. I conclude by spelling out some of the methodological consequences of the present approach.

Journal: Philosophy & Rhetoric
Published: 2021-12-01
DOI: 10.5325/philrhet.54.4.0397
Open Access: Closed
Topics: multimodality multilingual writers

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (0)

No articles in this index cite this work.

Cites in this index (2)

Stevens (2021)

Fooling the Victim: Of Straw Men and Those Who Fall for Them

Philosophy & Rhetoric
Zenker (2013)

What Do Normative Approaches to Argumentation Stand to Gain from Rhetorical Insights?

Philosophy & Rhetoric

Also cites 13 works outside this index ↓

(2004)

“John Snow, William Farr and the 1849 Outbreak of Cholera That Affected London: A Reworki…

Public Health ↗
(2019)

“Logical Fallacies and Reasonable Debates in Invasion Biology: A Response to Guiaşu and T…

Biology & Philosophy ↗
(2000)

“Rhetoric and Dialectic from the Standpoint of Normative Pragmatics.”

Argumentation ↗
(2011)

“Towards a Critique-Friendly Approach to the Straw Man Fallacy Evaluation.”

Argumentation ↗
(2013)

“Why Arguments from Expert Opinion Are Weak Arguments.”

Informal Logic ↗
(2016)

“Criticism without Fundamental Principles.”

Informal Logic ↗
(1976)

“On Viewing Rhetoric as Epistemic: Ten Years Later.”

Central States Speech Journal ↗
(2012)

“Thomas Wakley (1795–1862): A Biographical Sketch.”

Lancet ↗
(2012)

“The Pragma-Dialectical Theory under Discussion.”

Argumentation ↗
(2009)

“How Should One Respond to Fallacious Moves?”

Argumentation and Advocacy ↗
(2000)

“The (Un)reasonableness of Ad Hominem Fallacies.”

Journal of Language and Social Psychology ↗
(2011)

“The Assessment of Argumentation from Expert Opinion.”

Argumentation ↗
(2000)

“Case Study of the Use of a Circumstantial Ad Hominem in Political Argumentation.”

Philosophy & Rhetoric ↗

CrossRef global citation count: 2 View in citation network →