Archive for the argumentation category

Martin Kusch, Psychologism (3)

Kusch, Martin. Psychologism: A Case Study in the Sociology of Philosophical Knowledge. London; New York: Routledge, 1995. See also the Four Appendices to Psychologism (1995). http://www.academia.edu/1078102/Four_Appendices_to_PSYCHOLOGISM_1995_ Finally we come to Kusch’s summary and conclusions. Kusch summarizes the book and his approach to Sociology of Philosophical Knowledge (SPK). Kusch adheres to Bloor’s strong programme in the […]

Witold Gombrowicz: Philosophy in 6 1/4 hours (2)

Witold Gombrowicz, A Guide to Philosophy in Six Hours and Fifteen Minutes; translated by Benjamin Ivry. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2004. 109, [1] pp. [8] Existentialism [Heidegger, Husserl, Sartre] (4 May 1969) [9] Existentialism [Kierkegaard, Descartes, Sartre] (5 May 1969) [10] Freedom in Sartre (6 May 1969) [11] The View of Others [Sartre] (7 […]

Dascal on Leibniz, epistemology & intellectual cooperation

I began this post on August 12, 2008 with these references. In lieu of reviewing this fascinating subject matter now, here is the bibliography: Dascal, Marcelo. Leibniz and Epistemological Diversity. In A. Lamarra and R. Palaia (eds.), Unita e Molteplicita nel Pensiero Filosofico e Scientifico di Leibniz (Simposio Internazionale Roma, October 1996). Roma: Leo S. […]

Dascal on controversies

Dascal, Marcelo. Types of polemics and types of polemical moves. In S. Cmejrkova, J. Hoffmannova, O. Mullerova, and J. Svetla, Dialogue Analysis VI (= Proceedings of the 6th Conference, Prague 1996), vol. 1. Tubingen: Max Niemeyer, 15-33, 1998 [Reprinted in H.S. Gill and G. Manetti (eds.), Signs and Signification, vol. II, New Delhi: Bahri Publication, […]

Leibniz & ‘soft reason’ – M. Dascal

Dascal, Marcelo. Nihil sine ratione -> Blandior ratio (‘Nothing without a reason -> A softer reason’). In H. Poser (ed.), Nihil sine ratione (Proceedings of the VII. Internationaler Leibniz-Kongress). Berlin, 2001, Volume I, pages 276-280. The main thesis of this paper is that Leibniz’s encompassing rationalism, as expressed by the Principle of Sufficient Reason (as […]

Dascal on disputation & the analytical-continental divide

Dascal, Marcello. How rational can a polemic across the analytic-continental ‘divide’ be?, International Journal of Philosophical Studies 9(3): 313-339, 2001. In order to specify controversy’s position within the large family of polemical dialogues, I propose to distinguish between three members of the subfamily to which controversies belong. I will call them ‘discussion’, ‘dispute’, and ‘controversy’. […]