Henrique Ribeiro

In contrast to the vast literature on the relationships between philosophy and utopia, for which the latter is simply an object of the former, the author shows to what extent philosophy itself can be a matter of utopia, i.e., an essentially utopian discourse, while, on the other hand, being a discourse that can transform reality ideologically. The philosophy of science, from Descartes and Kant to the present, is the framework used to exemplify this new approach, starting with Karl Mannheim’s and Paul Ricoeur’s studies on utopia and its relationship with ideology. The central thesis is that the discourse on sciences has its seat in a “no-place” or a “nowhere”, which is the ideal laboratory for philosophic work, where sciences are reconstructed both epistemologically and ideologically.

The present volume assembles a relevant set of studies of argument by analogy, which address this topic in a systematic fashion, either from an essentially theoretical perspective or from the perspective of it being applied to different fields like politics, linguistics, literature, law, medicine, science in general and philosophy. All result from original research conducted by their authors for this publication. Thus, broadly speaking, this is an exception which we find worthy of occupying a special place in the sphere of the bibliography on the argument by analogy. In effect, most of the contexts of the publications on this topic focus on specific areas, for example everyday discourse, science or law theory, while underestimating or sometimes even ignoring other interdisciplinary scopes, as is the case of literature, medicine or philosophy. The idiosyncrasy of this volume is that the reader and the researcher may follow the development of different theoretical outlooks on argument by analogy, while measuring the scope of its application to the aforementioned areas as a whole.

Virtually for the first time in the known historiography on the present impact of Karl Popper’s philosophy upon the theory of rhetoric and argumentation, this impact is scrupulously analysed and its most important dimensions are highlighted. The author shows how the above impact is crucial to understanding some contemporary schools within the scope of that theory, such as pragma-dialectics. The limitations of Popper’s philosophy are carefully analysed while, on the other hand, the limitations of the theory of rhetoric and argumentation itself are thoroughly discussed, in order to properly appreciate the contribution in question. Globally, it is concluded that Popper’s influence is inescapable.