LEADER 04394nam 2200709 a 450 001 9910956942003321 005 20240514061604.0 010 $a1-283-35955-3 010 $a9786613359551 010 $a90-272-8057-6 035 $a(CKB)2550000000072941 035 $a(EBL)805849 035 $a(OCoLC)769342243 035 $a(SSID)ssj0000552186 035 $a(PQKBManifestationID)11387340 035 $a(PQKBTitleCode)TC0000552186 035 $a(PQKBWorkID)10564802 035 $a(PQKB)11021018 035 $a(MiAaPQ)EBC805849 035 $a(Au-PeEL)EBL805849 035 $a(CaPaEBR)ebr10517123 035 $a(CaONFJC)MIL335955 035 $a(DE-B1597)729666 035 $a(DE-B1597)9789027280572 035 $a(EXLCZ)992550000000072941 100 $a20030226d1982 uy 0 101 0 $aeng 135 $aur|n|---||||| 181 $ctxt$2rdacontent 182 $cc$2rdamedia 183 $acr$2rdacarrier 200 10$aTopical relevance in argumentation /$fDouglas N. Walton 205 $a1st ed. 210 $aAmsterdam ;$aPhiladelphia $cJ. Benjamins$d1982 215 $a1 online resource (89 pages) 225 1 $aPragmatics & beyond,$x0166-6258 ;$v3:8 311 0 $a90-272-2524-9 320 $aIncludes bibliography (p. 76-79) and index. 327 $aTOPICAL 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-Relevance 327 $aENERGY 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 RELATEDNESS 327 $a3.0 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 Relevance 327 $a4.7 Types of Questions and Answers 4.8 Rules o f Responding; 4.9 Types of Relevance Compared; 4.10 Conditionals in Disputation; NOTES; REFERENCES; INDEX 330 $aIt is a longstanding if not altogether coherent tradition of logic and rhetorical studies that an argument can be incorrect or fallacious in virtue of some proposition in it being "irrelevant". This monograph clarifies that tradition. Non-classical propositional calculi, including relevance logics and relatedness logics, are juxtaposed against conversational criticisms of irrelevance in natural argumentation, e.g. in parliamentary debates. The object is to see if there is a reasonable way of evaluating criticisms like "That's beside the point!" or "That's irrelevant!". 410 0$aPragmatics & beyond ;$v3:8. 606 $aReasoning 606 $aRelevance (Philosophy) 606 $aDebates and debating 606 $aLogic 615 0$aReasoning. 615 0$aRelevance (Philosophy) 615 0$aDebates and debating. 615 0$aLogic. 676 $a160 686 $aER 640$2rvk 700 $aWalton$b Douglas N$0214601 801 0$bMiAaPQ 801 1$bMiAaPQ 801 2$bMiAaPQ 906 $aBOOK 912 $a9910956942003321 996 $aTopical relevance in argumentation$9606378 997 $aUNINA