01030nam0 22002651i 450 UON0020128120231205103254.90920030730d1981 |0itac50 baengGB|||| 1||||Anne Thackerary Ritchiea BiographyWinifred GérinOxford [etc.]Oxford University Press1981xvi, 310 p.21 cm.THACKERAY ANNE RITCHIEUONC084715FIGBOxfordUONL000029823.8Narrativa inglese. Periodo vittoriano, 1837-1900.21GERINWinifredUONV113922197600Oxford University PressUONV245947650ITSOL20240220RICASIBA - SISTEMA BIBLIOTECARIO DI ATENEOUONSIUON00201281SIBA - SISTEMA BIBLIOTECARIO DI ATENEOSI Angl V B THA GER SI LO 19941 5 BuonoAnne Thackerary Ritchie1254355UNIOR01108cam0 22002771 450 SOBE0008222620250311112710.0082230428720250311d1979 |||||ita|0103 baengUSPraise and blame in Renaissance Romerhetoric, doctrine, and reform in the sacred orators of the papal court, c. 1450-1521by John W. O'MalleyDurham, N.C.Duke University Press1979XII, 276 p.25 cmDuke monographs in Medieval and Renaissance studies3001SOBE000822272001 *Duke monographs in Medieval and Renaissance studies3O'Malley, John W.SOBA0003263507059736ITUNISOB20250311RICAUNISOBUNISOBFondo|Calì182192SOBE00082226M 102 Monografia moderna SBNMFondo|Calì000003SI18219220250306CalidonoNmenleUNISOBUNISOB20250311112524.020250311112710.0menlePraise and blame in Renaissance Rome2982079UNISOB04394nam 2200709 a 450 991095694200332120240514061604.01-283-35955-3978661335955190-272-8057-6(CKB)2550000000072941(EBL)805849(OCoLC)769342243(SSID)ssj0000552186(PQKBManifestationID)11387340(PQKBTitleCode)TC0000552186(PQKBWorkID)10564802(PQKB)11021018(MiAaPQ)EBC805849(Au-PeEL)EBL805849(CaPaEBR)ebr10517123(CaONFJC)MIL335955(DE-B1597)729666(DE-B1597)9789027280572(EXLCZ)99255000000007294120030226d1982 uy 0engur|n|---|||||txtrdacontentcrdamediacrrdacarrierTopical relevance in argumentation /Douglas N. Walton1st ed.Amsterdam ;Philadelphia J. Benjamins19821 online resource (89 pages)Pragmatics & beyond,0166-6258 ;3:890-272-2524-9 Includes bibliography (p. 76-79) and index.TOPICAL RELEVANCE IN ARGUMENTATION; Editorial page; Title page; Copyright page; Dedication; Acknowledgements; Table of contents; 1. CONVERSATIONAL ALLEGATIONS OF IRRELEVANCE; 1.0 Objective of Study; 1.1 Dual Nature of Pragmatic Analysis; 1.2 Disputation Theory; 1.3 Standard Preconceptions o f Irrelevance; 1.4 Fallacies o f Emotional Distraction; 1.5 Ad Misericordiam Arguments; 1.6 A Contrastive Case Study; 1.7 The Ad Hominem Fallacy; 1.8 Relevant Answers to Questions; IMMIGRATION TIMOTHY LEARY: REASON ALLOWED TO ENTER CANADA; 1.9 A Second Case Study of Question-RelevanceENERGY SALE OF GASOLINE TO UNITED STATES CITIZENS 1.10 Function o f Questioning in Parliamentary Debate; 2. PROPOSITIONAL INFERENCES IN DISPUTATION; 2.0 Relevance in Games of Dialogue; 2.1 Refutation and Propositional Structure; 2.2 Classical Propositional Logic: Basic Elements; 2.3 Valid Arguments in Classical Logic; 2.4 Astounding Inferences in Classical Logic; 2.5 Relatedness Propositional Logic: Basic Elements; 2.6 Valid Arguments in Relatedness Logic; 2.7 The Astounding Inferences Revisited; 2.8 The Propositional Core of Disputation; 3. PARADOXES, SOPHISMS AND RELATEDNESS3.0 The Meaning of Relatedness 3.1 Act-Sequences and Relatedness; 3.2 Subject-Matter Contents of Propositions; 3.3 Paradoxes and Astounding Inferences; 3.4 Missing Factors; 3.5 Needed Premises in Inferences; 3.6 Irrelevant Premises; 3.7. Pluralism of Concepts of Relevance; 3.8 Information Inclusion; 4. CRITICISMS OF IRRELEVANCE IN GAMES OF DIALOGUE; 4.0 Six Types of Criticisms of Irrelevance; 4.1 Varieties of Games; 4.2 Strong and Weak Refutation; 4.3 Symmetrical and Asymmetrical Games; 4.4 Misconception of Refutation; 4.5 Pertinence; 4.6 Question-Answer Relevance4.7 Types of Questions and Answers 4.8 Rules o f Responding; 4.9 Types of Relevance Compared; 4.10 Conditionals in Disputation; NOTES; REFERENCES; INDEXIt is a longstanding if not altogether coherent tradition of logic and rhetorical studies that an argument can be incorrect or fallacious in virtue of some proposition in it being "irrelevant". This monograph clarifies that tradition. Non-classical propositional calculi, including relevance logics and relatedness logics, are juxtaposed against conversational criticisms of irrelevance in natural argumentation, e.g. in parliamentary debates. The object is to see if there is a reasonable way of evaluating criticisms like "That's beside the point!" or "That's irrelevant!".Pragmatics & beyond ;3:8.ReasoningRelevance (Philosophy)Debates and debatingLogicReasoning.Relevance (Philosophy)Debates and debating.Logic.160ER 640rvkWalton Douglas N214601MiAaPQMiAaPQMiAaPQBOOK9910956942003321Topical relevance in argumentation606378UNINA