Criticism without fundamental principles

Eugen Octav Popa

doi:10.22329/il.v36i2.4641

Criticism without fundamental principles

Eugen Octav Popa^*

^*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › Scientific › peer-review

5 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

In this paper I develop and defend a form of argumentative nor-mativity that is not based on fundamental principles. I first argue that research agendas that aim to discover (or claimed to have discovered) fundamental principles of 'good' argumentative discourse share one crucial weak spot, viz. circularity. I then argue that this weak spot can be avoided in a pancritical (Bartley, 1984) view of normativity.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	192-216
Number of pages	25
Journal	Informal Logic
Volume	36
Issue number	2
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.22329/il.v36i2.4641
Publication status	Published - 2016
Externally published	Yes

Keywords

Argumentation theory
Criticism
Idealizations
Normativity
Pragma-dialectics

Access to Document

10.22329/il.v36i2.4641

Cite this

@article{2f48f90becf0443b9545f5dd9ec70678,

title = "Criticism without fundamental principles",

abstract = "In this paper I develop and defend a form of argumentative nor-mativity that is not based on fundamental principles. I first argue that research agendas that aim to discover (or claimed to have discovered) fundamental principles of 'good' argumentative discourse share one crucial weak spot, viz. circularity. I then argue that this weak spot can be avoided in a pancritical (Bartley, 1984) view of normativity.",

keywords = "Argumentation theory, Criticism, Idealizations, Normativity, Pragma-dialectics",

author = "Popa, {Eugen Octav}",

year = "2016",

doi = "10.22329/il.v36i2.4641",

language = "English",

volume = "36",

pages = "192--216",

journal = "Informal Logic",

issn = "0824-2577",

publisher = "University of Windsor",

number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Criticism without fundamental principles

AU - Popa, Eugen Octav

PY - 2016

Y1 - 2016

N2 - In this paper I develop and defend a form of argumentative nor-mativity that is not based on fundamental principles. I first argue that research agendas that aim to discover (or claimed to have discovered) fundamental principles of 'good' argumentative discourse share one crucial weak spot, viz. circularity. I then argue that this weak spot can be avoided in a pancritical (Bartley, 1984) view of normativity.

AB - In this paper I develop and defend a form of argumentative nor-mativity that is not based on fundamental principles. I first argue that research agendas that aim to discover (or claimed to have discovered) fundamental principles of 'good' argumentative discourse share one crucial weak spot, viz. circularity. I then argue that this weak spot can be avoided in a pancritical (Bartley, 1984) view of normativity.

KW - Argumentation theory

KW - Criticism

KW - Idealizations

KW - Normativity

KW - Pragma-dialectics

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85011602115&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.22329/il.v36i2.4641

DO - 10.22329/il.v36i2.4641

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85011602115

SN - 0824-2577

VL - 36

SP - 192

EP - 216

JO - Informal Logic

JF - Informal Logic

IS - 2

ER -

Criticism without fundamental principles

Abstract

Keywords

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this