Ni son "épreuve de tautologie" et ni son "épreuve de vérification" indiquent de façon nette et précise si un argu-ment est analytique ou non. Résumé: La formulation de Toulmin des "arguments analytiques" dans son livre de 1958, The Uses of Ar-gument, est problématique. While this is a worthwhile project, we need not adopt Toulmin's con-fusing formulation of analytic and substantial arguments to take it seri-ously. What Toul-min's distinction amounts to is an injunction to pay more attention to the criteria that make for cogent ar-guments, with their field-dependent inference warrants and backings, and less attention to categorical syllo-gisms, with their deductive entail-ments expressed in ideal language. Since these tests supposedly illustrate how we can recognize ana-lytic arguments, Toulmin's notion of analytic arguments and his distinc-tion between analytic and. Neither Toulmin's "tautology test" nor his "verification test" straightforwardly indicates whether an argument is analytic or not. Toulmin's formulation of "analytic arguments" in his 1958 book, The Uses of Argument, is problematic.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |