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). 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’. […]