首页> 外文期刊>Argumentation >Cogency in Motion: Critical Contextualism and Relevance
【24h】

Cogency in Motion: Critical Contextualism and Relevance

机译:运动中的权威:批判性语境和相关性

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

If arguments are to generate public knowledge, as in the sciences, then they must travel, finding acceptance across a range of local contexts. But not all good arguments travel, whereas some bad arguments do. Under what conditions may we regard the capacity of an argument to travel as a sign of its cogency or public merits? This question is especially interesting for a contextualist approach that wants to remain critically robust: if standards of cogency are bound to local contexts of evaluation, then how may arguments legitimately travel at all? The key to a contextualist conception of cogent travel, I argue, lies in the way local contexts are linked to broader contexts of evaluation by relations of relevance. The burden of the article is to elaborate the different forms these relations can take in the travel of scientific arguments.
机译:如果像科学一样,争论是为了产生公共知识,那么它们就必须传播,并在一系列当地环境中获得认可。但是,并非所有好的论点都会传播,而有些不好的论点会传播。在什么条件下,我们可以将论点的论据能力作为其说服力或公共功绩的标志?对于要保持批判性鲁棒性的情境主义方法而言,这个问题尤其有趣:如果将强制性标准约束到本地评估环境,那么论点如何合法地传播呢?我认为,情趣旅行的情境主义概念的关键在于,当地情境通过关联关系与更广泛的评价情境相联系的方式。本文的责任是阐述这些关系在科学论证中可以采取的不同形式。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号