"Coalescent Argumentation" is based on the concept that arguments can function from agreement, rather than disagreement. To prove this idea, Gilbert first discusses how several components--emotional, visceral (physical) and kisceral (intuitive) are utilized in an argumentative setting by people everyday. These components, also characterized as "modes," are vital to argumentative communication because they affect both the argument and the resulting outcome.
In addition to the components/modes, this book also stresses the goals in argumentation as a means for understanding one's own and one's opposer's positions. Gilbert argues that by viewing positions as complex human events involving a variety of communicative modes, we are better able to find commonalities across positions, and, therefore, move from conflict to resolution. By focusing on agreement and shared goals in all modes, arguers can coalesce diverse positions and more easily distinguish between minor or unrelated differences and core disagreements. This permits much greater latitude for locating shared beliefs, values, and attitudes that will lead to conflict resolution.

This introduction to modern formal logic also contains discussions on more philosophical issues, such as truth, conditionals and modal logic. It presents the formal material using informal explanations and arguments rather than rigorous development. Worked examples and exercises enable readers to check their progress. The aim is to equip students with: a complete and clear account of the truth-tree system for first order logic; the importance of logic and its relevance to many different disciplines; the skills needed to grasp sophisticated formal reasoning techniques necessary to explore complex metalogic; and the ability to contest claims that "ordinary" reasoning is well represented by formal first order logic. The issues covered include truth-functional and full first order logic, using the truth-tree or semantic tableau approach. Completeness and soundness proofs are given for both truth-functional and first order trees. Much use is made of induction, which is presented in a clear and consistent manner. There is also discussion of alternative deductive systems.

Originally published in 1938. This compact treatise is a complete treatment of Aristotle's logic as containing negative terms. It begins with defining Aristotelian logic as a subject-predicate logic confining itself to the four forms of categorical proposition known as the A, E, I and O forms. It assigns conventional meanings to these categorical forms such that subalternation holds. It continues to discuss the development of the logic since the time of its founder and address traditional logic as it existed in the twentieth century. The primary consideration of the book is the inclusion of negative terms - obversion, contraposition etc. - within traditional logic by addressing three questions, of systematization, the rules, and the interpretation.

Contents:
Introduction. Part 1: Truth-Functional Logic Chapter 1. The Basics 1. Deductively Valid Inference 2. Syntax: Connectives and the Principle of Composition 3. Semantics: Truth-Functionality 4. Negation and Conjunction 5. Disjunction 6. Truth-Functional Equivalence 7. The Conditional 8. Some Other Connectives, and the Biconditional Chapter 2. Truth Trees 1. Truth-Functionally Valid Inference 2. Conjugate Tree Diagrams 3. Truth Trees 4. Tautologies and Contradictions Chapter 3. Propositional Languages 1. Propositional Languages 2. Object Language and Metalanguage 3. Ancestral Trees 4. An Induction Principle 5. Multiple Conjunctions and Disjunctions 6. The Disjunctive Normal Form Theorem 7. Adequate Sets of Connectives 8. The Duality Principle 9. Conjunctive Normal Forms Chapter 4. Soundness and Completeness 1. The Standard Propositional Language 2. Truth Trees Again 3. Truth-Functional Consistency, Truth-Functionally Valid Inferences, and Trees 4. Soundness and Completeness Part 2: First Order Logic Chapter 5. Introduction 1. Some Non-Truth-Functional Inferences 2. Quantifiers and Variables 3. Relations 4. Formalising English Sentences Chapter 6. First Languages: Syntax and Two More Trees Rules 1. First Order Languages 2. Two More Tree Rules 3. Tree Proofs Chapter 7. First Order Languages: Semantics 1. Interpretations 2. Formulas and Truth 3. The Tree Rules Revisited 4. Consistency and Validity 5. Logical Truth and Logical Equivalence Chapter 8. Soundness and Completeness 1. Applying the Tree Rules 2. Branch Models 3. Soundness and Completeness Theorems 4. Compactness Chapter 9. Identity 1. Identity 2. Tree Rules For Identity 3. Some Arithmetic 4. Functions and Function Symbols 5. Working with Equations 6. Is Identity Part of Logic? Chapter 10. Alternative Deductive Systems for First Order Logic 1. Introduction 2. H 3 ND 4. Comparisons 5. Intuitionism Chapter 11. First Order Theories 1. First Order Theories 2. Infinite Cardinals 3. Lowenheim-Skolem Theorems 4. Second Order Languages 5. Completeness 6. The Liar Paradox Chapter 12. Beyond the Fringe 1. Counterfactual Conditions 2. Modal Propositional Logic 3. Indicative Conditionals and 4. Conclusion. List of Notation. Answers to Selected Exercises.

"Coalescent Argumentation" is based on the concept that arguments can function from agreement, rather than disagreement. To prove this idea, Gilbert first discusses how several components--emotional, visceral (physical) and kisceral (intuitive) are utilized in an argumentative setting by people everyday. These components, also characterized as "modes," are vital to argumentative communication because they affect both the argument and the resulting outcome.
In addition to the components/modes, this book also stresses the goals in argumentation as a means for understanding one's own and one's opposer's positions. Gilbert argues that by viewing positions as complex human events involving a variety of communicative modes, we are better able to find commonalities across positions, and, therefore, move from conflict to resolution. By focusing on agreement and shared goals in all modes, arguers can coalesce diverse positions and more easily distinguish between minor or unrelated differences and core disagreements. This permits much greater latitude for locating shared beliefs, values, and attitudes that will lead to conflict resolution.

A timely and accessible guide to 100 of the most infamous logical fallacies in Western philosophy, helping readers avoid and detect false assumptions and faulty reasoning You'll love this book or you'll hate it. So, you're either with us or against us. And if you're against us then you hate books. No true intellectual would hate this book. Ever decide to avoid a restaurant because of one bad meal? Choose a product because a celebrity endorsed it? Or ignore what a politician says because she's not a member of your party? For as long as people have been discussing, conversing, persuading, advocating, proselytizing, pontificating, or otherwise stating their case, their arguments have been vulnerable to false assumptions and faulty reasoning. Drawing upon a long history of logical falsehoods and philosophical flubs, Bad Arguments demonstrates how misguided arguments come to be, and what we can do to detect them in the rhetoric of others and avoid using them ourselves. Fallacies--or conclusions that don't follow from their premise--are at the root of most bad arguments, but it can be easy to stumble into a fallacy without realizing it. In this clear and concise guide to good arguments gone bad, Robert Arp, Steven Barbone, and Michael Bruce take readers through 100 of the most infamous fallacies in Western philosophy, identifying the most common missteps, pitfalls, and dead-ends of arguments gone awry. Whether an instance of sunk costs, is ought, affirming the consequent, moving the goal post, begging the question, or the ever-popular slippery slope, each fallacy engages with examples drawn from contemporary politics, economics, media, and popular culture. Further diagrams and tables supplement entries and contextualize common errors in logical reasoning. At a time in our world when it is crucial to be able to identify and challenge rhetorical half-truths, this bookhelps readers to better understand flawed argumentation and develop logical literacy. Unrivaled in its breadth of coverage and a worthy companion to its sister volume Just the Arguments (2011), Bad Arguments is an essential tool for undergraduate students and general readers looking to hone their critical thinking and rhetorical skills.

First Published in 2004. Routledge is an imprint of Taylor & Francis, an informa company.

This long-awaited book replaces not one but both of Hughes and Cresswell's two previous classic studies of modal logic: "An Introduction to Modal Logic" and "A Companion to Modal Logic."
"A New Introduction to Modal Logic" has been completely rewritten by the authors to incorporate all the developments that have taken place since 1968 both in modal propositional logical and modal predicate logic, but without sacrificing the clarity of exposition and approachability that were essential features of the earlier works.
The book takes readers through the most basic systems of modal prepositional logic right up to systems of modal predicate with identity. It deals with both technical developments such as completeness and incompleteness, and finite and infinite models, and discusses philosophical applications, especially, in the area of modal predicate logic.

A new direction in philosophy
Between 1920 and 1940 logical empiricism reset the direction of philosophy of science and much of the rest of Anglo-American philosophy. It began as a relatively organized movement centered on the Vienna Circle, and like-minded philosophers elsewhere, especially in Berlin. As Europe drifted into the Nazi era, several important figures, especially Carnap and Neurath, also found common ground in their liberal politics and radical social agenda. Together, the logical empiricists set out to reform traditional philosophy with a new set of doctrines more firmly grounded in logic and science.
Criticism and decline
Because of Nazi persecution, most of the European adherents of logical empiricism moved to the United States in the late 1930s. During the 1940s, many of their most cherished tenets became targets of criticism from outsiders as well as from within their own ranks. Philosophers of science in the late 1950s and 1960s rejected logical empiricism and, starting in the 1970s, presented such alternative programs such as scientific realism with evolutionary epistemology.
A resurgence of interest
During the early 1980s, philosophers and historians of philosophy began to study logical empiricism as an important movement. Unlike their predecessors in the 1960s-for whom the debate over logical empiricism now seems to have been largely motivated by professional politics-these philosopher no longer have to take positions for or against logical empiricism. The result has been a more balanced view of that movement, its achievements, its failures, and its influence.
Hard-to-find core writings now available
This collection makes available a selection of the most influential and representative writings of the logical empiricists, important contemporary criticisms of their doctrines, their responses, as well as the recent reappraisals. Introductions to each volume examine the articles in historical context and provide important background information that is vital to a full understanding of the issues discussed. They outline prevalent trends, identifying leading figures and summarize their positions and reasoning, as well as those of opposing thinkers. Available individually by volume.
1. The Emergence of Logical Empiricism (0-8153-2262-3) 432 pages
2. Logical Empiricism at its Peak (0-8153-2263-1) 4243 pages
3. Logic, Probability, and Epistemology (0-8153-2264-X) 424 pages
4. Logical Empiricism and the Special Sciences (0-8153-2265-8) 376 pages
5. Decline and Obsolescence of Logical Empiricsm (0-8153-2266-6) 440 pages
6. The Legacy of the Vienna Circle (0-8153-2267-4) 400 pages

A new direction in philosophy
Between 1920 and 1940 logical empiricism reset the direction of philosophy of science and much of the rest of Anglo-American philosophy. It began as a relatively organized movement centered on the Vienna Circle, and like-minded philosophers elsewhere, especially in Berlin. As Europe drifted into the Nazi era, several important figures, especially Carnap and Neurath, also found common ground in their liberal politics and radical social agenda. Together, the logical empiricists set out to reform traditional philosophy with a new set of doctrines more firmly grounded in logic and science.
Criticism and decline
Because of Nazi persecution, most of the European adherents of logical empiricism moved to the United States in the late 1930s. During the 1940s, many of their most cherished tenets became targets of criticism from outsiders as well as from within their own ranks. Philosophers of science in the late 1950s and 1960s rejected logical empiricism and, starting in the 1970s, presented such alternative programs such as scientific realism with evolutionary epistemology.
A resurgence of interest
During the early 1980s, philosophers and historians of philosophy began to study logical empiricism as an important movement. Unlike their predecessors in the 1960s-for whom the debate over logical empiricism now seems to have been largely motivated by professional politics-these philosopher no longer have to take positions for or against logical empiricism. The result has been a more balanced view of that movement, its achievements, its failures, and its influence.
Hard-to-find core writings now available
This collection makes available a selection of the most influential and representative writings of the logical empiricists, important contemporary criticisms of their doctrines, their responses, as well as the recent reappraisals. Introductions to each volume examine the articles in historical context and provide important background information that is vital to a full understanding of the issues discussed. They outline prevalent trends, identifying leading figures and summarize their positions and reasoning, as well as those of opposing thinkers.

Argumentation theory is a distinctly multidisciplinary field of inquiry. It draws its data, assumptions, and methods from disciplines as disparate as formal logic and discourse analysis, linguistics and forensic science, philosophy and psychology, political science and education, sociology and law, and rhetoric and artificial intelligence. This presents the growing group of interested scholars and students with a problem of access, since it is even for those active in the field not common to have acquired a familiarity with relevant aspects of each discipline that enters into this multidisciplinary matrix. This book offers its readers a unique comprehensive survey of the various theoretical contributions which have been made to the study of argumentation. It discusses the historical works that provide the background to the field and all major approaches and trends in contemporary research.
Argument has been the subject of systematic inquiry for twenty-five hundred years. It has been graced with theories, such as formal logic or the legal theory of evidence, that have acquired a more or less settled provenance with regard to specific issues. But there has been nothing to date that qualifies as a unified general theory of argumentation, in all its richness and complexity. This being so, the argumentation theorist must have access to materials and methods that lie beyond his or her "home" subject. It is precisely on this account that this volume is offered to all the constituent research communities and their students. Apart from the historical sections, each chapter provides an economical introduction to the problems and methods that characterize a given part of the contemporary research program. Because the chapters are self-contained, they can be consulted in the order of a reader's interests or research requirements. But there is value in reading the work in its entirety. Jointly authored by the very people whose research has done much to define the current state of argumentation theory and to point the way toward more general and unified future treatments, this book is an impressively authoritative contribution to the field.

This volume is a direct result of the International Symposium on Japanese Sentence Processing held at Duke University. The symposium provided the first opportunity for researchers in three disciplinary areas from both Japan and the United States to participate in a conference where they could discuss issues concerning Japanese syntactic processing. The goals of the symposium were three-fold: * to illuminate the mechanisms of Japanese sentence processing from the viewpoints of linguistics, psycholinguistics and computer science; * to synthesize findings about the mechanisms of Japanese sentence processing by researchers in these three fields in Japan and the United States; * to lay foundations for future interdisciplinary research in Japanese sentence processing, as well as international collaborations between researchers in Japan and the United States. The chapters in this volume have been written from the points of view of three different disciplines, with various immediate objectives -- from building usable speech understanding systems to investigating the nature of competence grammars for natural languages. All of the papers share the long term goal of understanding the nature of human language processing mechanisms. The book is concerned with two central issues -- the universality of language processing mechanisms, and the nature of the relation between the components of linguistic knowledge and language processing. This volume demonstrates that interdisciplinary research can be fruitful, and provides groundwork for further research in Japanese sentence processing.

First published in 1985. Routledge is an imprint of Taylor & Francis, an informa company.

When did Rembrandt get old? If you keep removing single grains of sand from a heap when is it no longer a heap? These questions and the many others like them will eventually lead us to the problem of vagueness. Timothy Williamson traces the history of the problem from discussions of the heap paradox in classical Greece to modern formal approaches, such as fuzzy logic. He shows the problems with views which have taken the position that standard logic and formal semantics do not apply to vague languages and defends the controversial realist view that vagueness is a kind of ignorance - there really is a grain of sand whose removal turns a heap into a non-heap, but we cannot know which one it is.

eBook available with sample pages: 020301426X

"This is a learned book without being ponderous; a book which explores most abstruse regions of philosophy and social theory while remaining legible and lucid thoughts; uncompromising in its determination to confront all the ecruciatingly complex issues of Foucault's legacy and its manifold reprecussions, without ever losing the reader's attention and facing the readers with an argument they can follow, assimilate and learn from "Zygmunt Bauman, Emeritus Professor in Sociology, Leeds University
This book places Foucault's methodologies against central currents in soical theory and philosophy to provide a guide to doing historical sociology and to chart an original position on the condition of social science today. It is addressed to those working at the cutting edge of social research and to those who wish to understand Foucault's legacy.

eBook available with sample pages: 0203414217

In the past 15 years a host of critical thinking books have appeared that teach students to find flaws in the arguments of others by learning to detect a number of informal fallacies. This book is not in that tradition. The authors of this book believe that while students learn to become vicious critics, they still continue to make the very mistakes they criticize in others. Thus, this book has adopted the approach of teaching the construction of good arguments first and then introducing criticism as a secondary skill. Moreover, the emphasis of the book is not on learning to name fallacies, but on being able to identify weaknesses in an argument so as to be able to construct an effective critique of that argument. The book is accompanied by a workbook featuring a wealth of examples to help students acquire the material.

In the past 15 years a host of critical thinking books have appeared that teach students to find flaws in the arguments of others by learning to detect a number of informal fallacies. This book is not in that tradition. The authors of this book believe that while students learn to become vicious critics, they still continue to make the very mistakes they criticize in others. Thus, this book has adopted the approach of teaching the construction of good arguments first and then introducing criticism as a secondary skill. Moreover, the emphasis of the book is not on learning to name fallacies, but on being able to identify weaknesses in an argument so as to be able to construct an effective critique of that argument. The book is accompanied by a workbook featuring a wealth of examples to help students acquire the material.

When this book was originally published in 1957 there had been lively debates on the air and in the press about the bearing of modern philosophy upon Christianity, but there had been relatively little sustained discussion of the subject. This book of essays was the product of a small group of Oxford philosophers and theologians, who had met and talked informally for some years before writing it. It is an attempt to discuss with care and candour some of the problems raised for Christian belief by contemporary analytical philosophy. In asking the questions raised, this book makes articulate the perplexities of many intelligent people, both believers and unbelievers. The contributors concentrate on the way such concepts as God, Revelation, the Soul, Grace are actually used rather than asserting or denying some very general theory of meaning.

Epistemic Logic studies statements containing verbs such as 'know' and 'wish'. It is one of the most exciting areas in medieval philosophy. Neglected almost entirely after the end of the Middle Ages, it has been rediscovered by philosophers of the present century. This is the first comprehensive study of the subject. Ivan Boh explores the rules for entailment between epistemic statements, the search for the conditions of knowing contingent propositions, the problems of substitutivity in intentional contexts, the relationship between epistemic and modal logic, and the problems of composite and divided senses in authors ranging from Abelard to Frachantian.

G.E. Moore, more than either Bertrand Russell or Ludwig Wittgenstein, was chiefly responsible for the rise of the analytic method in twentieth-century philosophy. This selection of his writings shows Moore at his very best.
The classic essays are crucial to major philosophical debates that still resonate today. Amongst those included are:
* A Defense of Common Sense
* Certainty
* Sense-Data
* External and Internal Relations
* Hume's Theory Explained
* Is Existence a Predicate?
* Proof of an External World
In addition, this collection also contains the key early papers in which Moore signals his break with idealism, and three important previously unpublished papers from his later work which illustrate his relationship with Wittgenstein.

Marx's Grundrisse is acknowledged as the vital link between Marx's early and late work. It is also a crucial text in elucidating Marx's debt to the idealist philosopher G.W.F. Hegel. This book, first published in 1988, is the first full-length study of that relationship, in a thorough textual analysis which makes the connections explicit and also the Grundrisse's relations to the works of Adam Smith and Aristotle. This book argues that Marx's critique of political economy, and his critique of Hegel, are double interrelated. Not only did Marx adapt Hegelian logic in order to analyse the economic categories crucial to modern society but it is argued that those logical categories were themselves seen as reflections of the productive processes of contemporary commercial society. Uchida reveals a conceptual structure common to the apparently rarefied world of Hegelian conceptual logic and to the supposedly common-sensical world of economic science. Demonstrating this is a considerable achievement, and it allows us to consider precisely what is valuable today in Marx's critical commentary on this conceptual structure and on the type of society in which it is manifested. Uchida's subject, like Marx's, is 'the force of capital on modern life'.

This volume gives a theoretical account of the problem of analyzing and evaluating argumentative discourse. After placing argumentation in a communicative perspective, and then discussing the fallacies that occur when certain rules of communication are violated, the authors offer an alternative to both the linguistically-inspired descriptive and logically-inspired normative approaches to argumentation.
The authors characterize argumentation as a complex speech act in a critical discussion aimed at resolving a difference of opinion. The various stages of a critical discussion are outlined, and the communicative and interactional aspects of the speech acts performed in resolving a simple or complex dispute are discussed. After dealing with crucial aspects of analysis and linking the evaluation of argumentative discourse to the analysis, the authors identify the fallacies that can occur at various stages of discussion. Their general aim is to elucidate their own pragma- dialectical perspective on the analysis and evaluation of argumentative discourse, bringing together pragmatic insight concerning speech acts and dialectical insight concerning critical discussion.

The mathematical proof is the most important form of justification in mathematics. It is not, however, the only kind of justification for mathematical propositions. The existence of other forms, some of very significant strength, places a question mark over the prominence given to proof within mathematics. This collection of essays, by leading figures working within the philosophy of mathematics, is a response to the challenge of understanding the nature and role of the proof.

Philosophy means 'love of wisdom,' but author Edmond Holmes fears the encroaching dominance of intellect over feeling. In this title, Holmes argues that metaphysics' reliance on intellect and pure reason undermines the study of philosophy. Rather, Holmes suggests a return to intuitional philosophy, combining thought and feeling. First published in 1930, this title will be ideal for students interested in Philosophy and Western Civilisation.