Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Non-traditional modes of arguing (emotional expressions, ... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Philosophy of Language
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Non-traditional modes of arguing (emotional expressions, physical demonstrations, intuitions) can be legitimate premises in arguments

    Philosophy of Language
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.An argument may consist of sentences and/or expressions of emotion, physical demonstrations, and intuitions
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A forlorn look or tears provide evidence that promotes coalescence
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Whatever provides evidence that promotes coalescence functions as a premise in an argument
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Valid premises must be truth-apt propositions capable of bearing logical relations like entailment and contradiction.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Emotional expressions and physical demonstrations are not truth-apt; they neither assert nor deny propositional content.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Therefore, non-propositional acts cannot function as premises without collapsing the distinction between persuasion and proof.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Habermas's discourse ethics requires that rational consensus emerge only from the unforced force of the better argument, not affective pressure.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Admitting emotional expressions as premises privileges rhetorically powerful affects over logically superior reasoning, distorting epistemic outcomes.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Legitimizing non-propositional inputs as argumentative premises conflates the causal genesis of belief with its rational justification.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    Philosophy of Language

    Related

    A forlorn look or tears provide evidence that promotes coalescenceAdmitting emotional expressions as premises privileges rhetorically powerful aff...An argument may consist of sentences and/or expressions of emotion, physical dem...Emotional expressions and physical demonstrations are not truth-apt; they neithe...
    +5 moreShow less
    Habermas's discourse ethics requires that rational consensus emerge only from th...Legitimizing non-propositional inputs as argumentative premises conflates the ca...Therefore, non-propositional acts cannot function as premises without collapsing...Valid premises must be truth-apt propositions capable of bearing logical relatio...Whatever provides evidence that promotes coalescence functions as a premise in a...

    Similar

    Non-traditional modes of arguing are valuable in real-life argumentati...89%Non-traditional modes of arguing can provide effective ways of resolvi...86%An argument may consist of sentences and/or expressions of emotion, ph...82%Expressions of emotion, physical actions (including body language), an...82%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: logic-informal
    View source passageHide passage
    According to Gilbert’s account, an argument may consist of sentences and/or expressions of emotion, physical demonstrations and difficult to define intuitions. This allows a forlorn look or tears to count as premises in an argument insofar as they provide evidence that promotes coalescence (and inference in this broad sense). As Gilbert argues, his non-traditional modes of arguing may, in real life situations, provide effective ways of resolving the disagreement that gives rise to argument.
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit