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
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Walton's dialectical theory holds that arguments are move... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→A good argument is one that justifies its conclusion by providing good reasons for believing it

    Walton's dialectical theory holds that arguments are moves in goal-directed dialogues, and justifying belief is only one legitimate dialogue type among several.

    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Real arguments occur in contexts like negotiation, inquiry, and persuasion that have different success criteria than pure justification.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Treating justification as the sole legitimate dialogue type artificially restricts how we understand rational discourse and reasoning.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Dialogue participants often have mixed goals—winning, understanding, and persuading simultaneously—that a single standard cannot capture.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.If all dialogue types are equally legitimate, we lose standards to distinguish good reasoning from manipulation or bad faith debate.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Justification remains the core epistemic purpose of argument; other dialogue goals often instrumentalize reasoning rather than ground it.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Describing arguments as merely 'goal-directed dialogue' risks collapsing logical standards into pragmatic success, obscuring rational norms.
      ?

      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.

    Connections

    2 topics

    Truth & Knowledge1 linkedPhilosophy of Language1 linked

    Related

    A good argument is one that justifies its conclusion by providing good reasons f...Describing arguments as merely 'goal-directed dialogue' risks collapsing logical...Dialogue participants often have mixed goals—winning, understanding, and persuad...If all dialogue types are equally legitimate, we lose standards to distinguish g...
    +3 moreShow less
    Justification remains the core epistemic purpose of argument; other dialogue goa...Real arguments occur in contexts like negotiation, inquiry, and persuasion that ...Treating justification as the sole legitimate dialogue type artificially restric...

    Details

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