Author： Adler Jonathan
Publisher： Springer Publishing Company
ISSN： 0920-427X
Source： Argumentation, Vol.18, Iss.3, 2004-01, pp. : 279-293
Disclaimer: Any content in publications that violate the sovereignty, the constitution or regulations of the PRC is not accepted or approved by CNPIEC.
Abstract
Is there a duty to respond to objections in order to present a good argument? Ralph Johnson argues that there is such a duty, which he refers to as the ‘dialectical tier</i>’ of an argument. I deny the (alleged) duty primarily on grounds that it would exert too great a demand on arguers, harming argumentation practices. The valuable aim of responding to objections, which Johnson’s dialectical tier is meant to satisfy, can be achieved in better ways, as argumentation is a social-epistemic activity.
Related content
Access to resources
Recommend
Epistemic and Dialectical Regress
Australasian Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 87, Iss. 1, 2009-03 ,pp. :
Epistemic and Dialectical Models of Begging the Question
Synthese, Vol. 152, Iss. 2, 2006-09 ,pp. :
Epistemic Trust and Social Location
Episteme, Vol. 3, Iss. 1-2, 2006-06 ,pp. :