Page 66 - Žagar, Igor Ž. 2021. Four Critical Essays on Argumentation. Ljubljana: Pedagoški inštitut.
P. 66
four critical essays on argumentation
Whenever we are judging, not only whether something is true or false,
free or unfree, but also whether something is a fallacy or not, we have to
take into consideration the circumstances, the audience, the purposes as
well as the intentions of the utterer. And when we do, we also have to bear
in mind the following:
When there are two or more parties to be considered, an argu-
ment may be acceptable in different degrees to different ones or
groups, and a dialectical appraisal can be conducted on a differ-
ent basis according to which party or group one has in mind; but
again, if we try to step outside and adjudicate, we have no basis
other than our own on which to do so. Truth and validity are on-
lookers’ concepts and presuppose a God’s-eye-view of the arena.
(Hamblin ibid.: 242)
The choice of arguments, criteria and acceptability of their use is al-
ways a matter that only the parties involved in the argumentative discus-
sion can decide on. According to their knowledge at the time of the discus-
sion, the circumstances in which the discussion takes place, the audiences
that are involved in the discussion, the purposes and intentions the parties
in the discussion have. And since these discussions take place in natural lan-
guages, in particular circumstances and at specific times, logic as an artifi-
cial system can’t really help.
66
Whenever we are judging, not only whether something is true or false,
free or unfree, but also whether something is a fallacy or not, we have to
take into consideration the circumstances, the audience, the purposes as
well as the intentions of the utterer. And when we do, we also have to bear
in mind the following:
When there are two or more parties to be considered, an argu-
ment may be acceptable in different degrees to different ones or
groups, and a dialectical appraisal can be conducted on a differ-
ent basis according to which party or group one has in mind; but
again, if we try to step outside and adjudicate, we have no basis
other than our own on which to do so. Truth and validity are on-
lookers’ concepts and presuppose a God’s-eye-view of the arena.
(Hamblin ibid.: 242)
The choice of arguments, criteria and acceptability of their use is al-
ways a matter that only the parties involved in the argumentative discus-
sion can decide on. According to their knowledge at the time of the discus-
sion, the circumstances in which the discussion takes place, the audiences
that are involved in the discussion, the purposes and intentions the parties
in the discussion have. And since these discussions take place in natural lan-
guages, in particular circumstances and at specific times, logic as an artifi-
cial system can’t really help.
66
