Walton's book is a study of several fallacies in informal logic.
Focusing on question-answer dialogues, and committed to a pragmatic
rather than a semantic approach, he attempts to generate criteria
for evaluating good and bad questions and answers. The book
contains a discussion of such well-recognized fallacies as many
questions, black-or-white questions, loaded questions, circular
arguments, question-begging assertions and epithets, ad hominem and
tu quoque arguments, ignoratio elenchi, and replying to a question
with a question. In addition, Walton develops several artificial
dialogue games and has an excellent discussion of burden of proof
in nonlegal contexts. The discussion is for the most part
nontechnical and does not presuppose any training in formal logic.
It is illustrated with many (sometimes overlong) examples of
fallacies drawn from real life--mostly debates in the Canadian
House of Commons. . . . Walton's book breaks new ground on a number
of issues. Choice This first full-length study of logical
fallacies, errors, faults, illicit attacks, blunders, and other
critical deficiencies in interrogation and reply has been written
in the tradition of informal fallacies in logic. It is especially
valuable, readable, and interesting because of the 139 case studies
it presents, many of these case studies come from political debates
and some from interviews, legal cross-examinations, and other
sources. Walton uses these challenging examples of tricky,
aggressive, argumentative, or fallacious questions to develop
coherent and pragmatic guidelines for criticizing questionable
questions (and in some cases their replies) on logical grounds.
Among the types of problematic questions analyzed are: the
traditional so-called fallacy of many questions, illustrated by the
famous Have you stopped beating your wife?; black and white
questions; terminologically loaded questions; and questions
containing personal attacks. These and other types of problematic
questions as well as evasive replies and replying to a question
with a question are studied. Critical errors of reasoning are
identified and analyzed by developing context-based, normative
models of reasonable dialogue in which a questioner must have
freedom to ask informative and probing questions, and the
respondent must be constrained to give reasonably direct, not
overly evasive answers. In this era of negative and evasive
political campaigning, with candidates employing skillful tactics
of manipulating public opinion to assure election rather than
taking clear stands and seriously debating issues in an informed
and sincere manner, Question-Reply Argumentation is especially
relevant reading for those who take democracy seriously. The
methods used reflect a significant shift from earlier semantically
based theories to current pragmatic, dialogue-based models, and
will be of interest to logicians and linguists. The volume's
conclusions should challenge some current preconceptions.
Recommended reading for courses in logic, speech communications,
linguistics, philosophy of language, areas of political science
relating to political discourse and debate, courses on questioning
in cognitive psychology, and courses on critical thinking in
education.
General
Is the information for this product incomplete, wrong or inappropriate?
Let us know about it.
Does this product have an incorrect or missing image?
Send us a new image.
Is this product missing categories?
Add more categories.
Review This Product
No reviews yet - be the first to create one!
Welcome to Loot.co.za!
Sign in / Register |Wishlists & Gift Vouchers |Help | Advanced search
