• PhilPapers
  • PhilPeople
  • PhilArchive
  • PhilEvents
  • PhilJobs
  • Sign in
PhilPeople
 
  • Sign in
  • News Feed
  • Find Philosophers
  • Departments
  • Radar
  • Help
 
profile-cover
Drag to reposition
profile picture

Trudy Rose Govier

  •  Home
  •  Publications
    113
    • Most Recent
    • Most Downloaded
    • Topics
  •  News and Updates
    97

 More details
University of Waterloo
Department of Philosophy
PhD, 1971
Lethbridge, Alberta, Canada
Areas of Specialization
Applied Ethics
Social and Political Philosophy
Logic and Philosophy of Logic
Areas of Interest
Applied Ethics
Meta-Ethics
Social and Political Philosophy
17th/18th Century Philosophy
  • All publications (113)
  •  241
    When Logic Meets Politics: Testimony, Distrust, and Rhetorical Disadvantage
    Informal Logic 15 (2). 1993.
    The contested testimony in the Hill-Thomas ease is an illuminating test case for universalistic theories about the reliability of testimony. There is no reasonable alternative to universalistic standards of epistemic appraisal. And yet the charge by feminists and others that such criteria can be applied selectively and used to discredit and silence people is shown to be accurate. The road to a solution is to offer guidelines for the interpretation and application of these norms
    Informal Logic
  •  33
    Commentary on Cohen & Rosenwald
  • Mark Warren, ed., Democracy and Trust
    Philosophy in Review 20 (4): 303-304. 2000.
  •  136
    Uncharitable Thoughts About Charity
    Informal Logic 4 (1). 1981.
    Informal Logic
  •  212
    A practical study of argument
    Wadsworth Pub. Co.. 1991.
    The book also comes with an exhaustive array of study aids that enable the reader to monitor and enhance the learning process.
    Reasoning
  •  216
    Johnson's Manifest Rationality A Pragmatic Theory of Argument
    Informal Logic 20 (3). 2000.
    Informal Logic
  •  95
    Theory, common sense and certainty
    Metaphilosophy 12 (1). 1981.
    20th Century British Philosophy20th Century Austrian Philosophy
  •  175
    Assessing Arguments: What Range of Standards
    Informal Logic 3 (1). 1980.
    Informal Logic
  •  86
    How We Trust Ourselves and What Happens When We Don’t
    Cogito 5 (3): 145-153. 1991.
  •  81
    20. Emotion, Relevance, and Consolation Arguments
    In Andrew D. Irvine & Kent A. Peacock (eds.), Mistakes of Reason: Essays in Honour of John Woods, University of Toronto Press. pp. 364-379. 2005.
  •  51
    Reflections on the authority of personal experience
    The authority of first person claims may be understood from an epistemic perspective or as a matter of social practice. Building on accounts of Hume, Nagel, and several more recent authors, it is argued that this authority should be understood as limited. To extend it beyond notions of what it is like to experience something, we shift from what should be a narrow subjective edge to a territory of objective claims, thereby reasoning incorrectly. A relevant application is the supposed authority of…Read more
    The authority of first person claims may be understood from an epistemic perspective or as a matter of social practice. Building on accounts of Hume, Nagel, and several more recent authors, it is argued that this authority should be understood as limited. To extend it beyond notions of what it is like to experience something, we shift from what should be a narrow subjective edge to a territory of objective claims, thereby reasoning incorrectly. A relevant application is the supposed authority of victims.
  •  29
    Book Review: Liberals and Cannibals: The Implications of Diversity (review)
    Philosophy of the Social Sciences 36 (4): 503-507. 2006.
    Philosophy of Social Science, Miscellaneous
  • Common Sense: Who Can Deny It?
    Eidos: The Canadian Graduate Journal of Philosophy 1
  •  232
    On Adler On Charity
    Informal Logic 4 (3). 1981.
    Informal Logic
  •  201
    Worries About Tu Quoque as a Fallacy
    Informal Logic 3 (3). 1980.
    Informal Logic
  •  35
    Commentary on Asquith
  •  61
    More on counter-considerations
    with Derek Allen
    In pro and con arguments, an arguer acknowledges that there are points against the conclu-sion reached. Such points have been called ‘counter-considerations.’ Their significance is explored here in the light of recent comments by Rongdong Jin, Hans Hansen and others. A conception of connector words such as “although”, “nevertheless,” and “but” is developed, as is a new model recognizing the need for an ‘on balance’ judgment in these arguments.
  •  169
    The promise and pitfalls of apology
    with Wilhelm Verwoerd
    Journal of Social Philosophy 33 (1). 2002.
    ForgivenessSocial and Political Philosophy, Miscellaneous
  •  94
    Book Review: After Evil: Responding to Wrongdoing (review)
    Journal of Moral Philosophy 2 (2): 248-251. 2005.
  •  5
    Jeffrey C. Goldfarb, The Cynical Society: The Culture of Politics and the Politics of Culture in American Life Reviewed by
    Philosophy in Review 12 (1): 25-28. 1992.
  •  107
    Tolerance and `dogmatism' in morals
    Mind 82 (325): 108-110. 1973.
    Toleration in Normative Theories
  •  47
    Global citizenship
    Cogito 3 (3): 208-216. 1989.
    Cosmopolitanism
  •  138
    What is a good argument?
    Metaphilosophy 23 (4): 393-409. 1992.
  •  4
    Douglas N. Walton, Arguer's Position: A Pragmatic Study of Ad Hominem Attack, Criticism, Refutation, and Fallacy Reviewed by
    Philosophy in Review 5 (9): 405-406. 1985.
    Informal Logic
  • Physical violence in political conflicts : Grounds for a strong presumption against violence
    In Timothy Shanahan (ed.), Philosophy 9/11: Thinking About the War on Terrorism, Open Court. 2005.
    TerrorismEthics and Justification of War
  •  186
    Who Says There Are No Fallacies?
    Informal Logic 5 (1). 1983.
    Informal Logic
  •  35
    Commentary on Fields
  •  163
    New Essays in Informal Logic
    Informal Logic 17 (3). 1995.
    Informal Logic
  •  75
    Victims and Victimhood
    Broadview Press. 2014.
    Who is a victim? Considerations of innocence typically figure in our notions of victimhood, as do judgments about causation, responsibility, and harm. Those identified as victims are sometimes silenced or blamed for their misfortune—responses that are typically mistaken and often damaging. However, other problems arise when we defer too much to victims, being reluctant to criticize their judgments or testimony. Reaching a sensitive and yet critical stand on victims’ credibility is a difficult ma…Read more
    Who is a victim? Considerations of innocence typically figure in our notions of victimhood, as do judgments about causation, responsibility, and harm. Those identified as victims are sometimes silenced or blamed for their misfortune—responses that are typically mistaken and often damaging. However, other problems arise when we defer too much to victims, being reluctant to criticize their judgments or testimony. Reaching a sensitive and yet critical stand on victims’ credibility is a difficult matter. In this book, Trudy Govier carefully examines the concept of victimhood and considers the practical implications of the various attitudes with which we may respond to victims. These issues are explored with reference to a range of complex examples, including child victims of institutional abuse and the famed Rigoberta Menchú controversy. Further topics include the authority of personal experience, restorative justice, restitution, forgiveness, and closure
    Ethics
  • Alternative to inductive-deductive paradigm
    Informal Logic
  • Prev.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • Next
PhilPeople logo

On this site

  • Find a philosopher
  • Find a department
  • The Radar
  • Index of professional philosophers
  • Index of departments
  • Help
  • Acknowledgments
  • Careers
  • Contact us
  • Terms and conditions

Brought to you by

  • The PhilPapers Foundation
  • The American Philosophical Association
  • Centre for Digital Philosophy, Western University
PhilPeople is currently in Beta Sponsored by the PhilPapers Foundation and the American Philosophical Association
Feedback