-
Kevin Scharp and Robert Brandom, eds., In the Space of Reasons: Selected Essays of Wilfrid Sellars (review)Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 44 (2): 363-366. 2008.
-
426The Significance of Al Gore’s Purported HypocrisyEnvironmental Ethics 31 (1): 111-112. 2009.This paper is a survey of a variety of hypocrisy charges levied against Al Gore. Understood properly, these hypocrisy charges actually support Gore's case.
-
93Evidentialism for everyoneThink 5 (15): 37-44. 2007.Should we always proportion belief to the available evidence? Scott Aikin believes so
-
564Three objections to the epistemic theory of argument rebuttedArgumentation and Advocacy 44 130-142. 2008.Three objections to the epistemic theory of argument are presented and briefly rebutted. In light of this reply, a case for argumentative eclecticism is made.
-
50The straw man fallacy consists in inappropriately constructing or selecting weak versions of the opposition's arguments. We will survey the three forms of straw men recognized in the literature, the straw, weak, and hollow man. We will then make the case that there are examples of inappropriately reconstructing stronger versions of the opposition's arguments. Such cases we will call iron man fallacies.
-
33Stoicism’s Integration Problem and Epictetus’ MetaphorsSouthwest Philosophy Review 29 (1): 185-193. 2013.
-
160Pragmatism, Naturalism, and PhenomenologyHuman Studies 29 (3): 317-340. 2007.Pragmatism’s naturalism is inconsistent with the phenomenological tradition’s anti-naturalism. This poses a problem for the methodological consistency of phenomenological work in the pragmatist tradition. Solutions such as phenomenologizing naturalism or naturalizing phenomenology have been proposed, but they fail. As a consequence, pragmatists and other naturalists must answer the phenomenological tradition’s criticisms of naturalism.
-
54Commentary on Democratic “Deliberation, Public Reason, and Environmental Politics”Environmental Philosophy 3 (2): 59-63. 2006.Editors’ Note: We decided that a commentary to the original Aikin essay from the perspective of humanities policy would be beneficial. We then invited Scott Aikin to respond to this commentary. What follows is (a) the Briggle/Frodeman commentary and (b) the Aikin response. We present the discussion in its entirety in the conviction that this transparency will help the reader to critically assess the viability of these arguments and to draw his/her own conclusion as to the efficacy of such reason…Read more
Nashville, Tennessee, United States of America
Areas of Specialization
| Epistemology |
| Ancient Greek and Roman Philosophy |
| American Pragmatism |
| Informal Logic |