HOW TO RESPOND TO A FALLACY?

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

This paper aims to resolve the following question: how should a reasonable arguer respond to a fallacy? To answer it, I take a dialectical approach to fallacies and consider their dialectical and rhetorical effects. Then, I review the current literature on the proper answer to fallacies to conclude that, under certain circumstances, all the answers provided in the literature can be helpful for the parties. Later, I attempt to provide some heuristic guidance to understand which response to a fallacy is better under which circumstance. To do that, I introduce two criteria for evaluating dialogues: the level of adversariality and the relevance of the epistemic goal. I will conclude that these criteria can help us understand which is the adequate response to fallacies and could also be important for addressing other problems in argumentation theory.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)5-28
Number of pages24
JournalCogency
Volume14
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Dec 2022

Keywords

  • adversariality
  • counter-fallacies
  • disagreement
  • epistemic goals
  • fallacies
  • heuristics
  • meta-dialogues
  • strategic manoeuvring

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Language and Linguistics
  • Communication
  • Linguistics and Language

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'HOW TO RESPOND TO A FALLACY?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this