•  2
    Reflections on Minimal Adversariality
    Informal Logic 43 (2): 523-537. 2021.
    Beginning with my 1999 account in The Philosophy of Argument, this essay explores views about adversariality in argument. Although my distinction between minimal and ancillary adversariality is widely accepted, there are flaws in my defense of the claim that all arguments exhibit minimal adversariality and in a lack of sensitivity to aspects of gender and culture. Further discussions of minimal adversariality, including those of Scott Aikin, John Casey, Katharina Stevens and Daniel Cohen, are di…Read more
  •  7
    Reflections on Minimal Adversariality
    Informal Logic 42 (4): 523-537. 2021.
    Beginning with my 1999 account in The Philosophy of Argument, this essay explores views about adversariality in argument. Although my distinction between minimal and ancillary adversariality is widely accepted, there are flaws in my defense of the claim that all arguments exhibit minimal adversariality and in a lack of sensitivity to aspects of gender and culture. Further discussions of minimal adversariality, including those of Scott Aikin, John Casey, Katharina Stevens and Daniel Cohen, are di…Read more
  •  1
    Demons, Dreamers and Madmen (review)
    Canadian Journal of Philosophy 3 (4): 681-689. 1974.
  •  14
    Reflections on Minimal Adversariality
    Informal Logic 42 (4): 523-537. 2021.
    Beginning with my 1999 account in The Philosophy of Argument, this essay explores views about adversariality in argument. Although my distinction between minimal and ancillary adversariality is widely accepted, there are flaws in my defense of the claim that all arguments exhibit minimal adversariality and in a lack of sensitivity to aspects of gender and culture. Further discussions of minimal adversariality, including those of Scott Aikin, John Casey, Katharina Stevens and Daniel Cohen, are di…Read more
  •  29
    Dilemmas regarding returning ISIS fighters
    with David Boutland
    Ethics and Global Politics 13 (2): 93-107. 2020.
  •  1493
    Problems in Argument Analysis and Evaluation
    University of Windsor. 2018.
    We are pleased to publish this WSIA edition of Trudy’s Govier’s seminal volume, Problems in Argument Analysis and Evaluation. Originally published in 1987 by Foris Publications, this was a pioneering work that played a major role in establishing argumentation theory as a discipline. Today, it is as relevant to the field as when it first appeared, with discussions of questions and issues that remain central to the study of argument. It has defined the main approaches to many of those issues and g…Read more
  •  14
    Issues of Logicism and Objectivity
    Informal Logic 37 (3): 211-222. 2017.
    Concerning Harald Wohlrapp’s theories, many fascinating issues arise. I shall concentrate here on aspects especially relevant to the treatment of pro and con argumentation, a type of what has been called conductive argument. Though initially intrigued by my efforts to describe and explore conductive argument, Harald Wohlrapp later concluded that my treatments were seriously flawed and that an alternative approach can serve to replace that problematic and much contested conception. Much of the di…Read more
  • Reflections
    Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines 30 (1): 4-8. 2015.
    This essay discusses some developments in informal logic and argumentation theory since 1980, commenting briefly on positive aspects and areas of disappointment.
  •  1
    Forgiveness and Revenge
    Philosophy 79 (307): 146-149. 2004.
  •  51
    Political Forgiveness (review)
    Dialogue 43 (2): 380-386. 2004.
  •  11
    I would first like to congratulate Harald Wohlrapp on the substantial success of his book on the philosophy of argument. The learning, originality, and energetic dedication shown in this work are impressive indeed. Concerning Harald Wohlrapp’s theories, many fascinating issues arise, as we will be hearing today and in further conversations. In this presentation I shall concentrate on two aspects especially relevant to the treatment of pro and con argumentation; as will be apparent, even on this …Read more
  •  6
    I consider several outstanding questions about analogies. These include the following: issues of interpretation especially with regard to whether an analogy should be considered argumentative, as distinct from serving as an illustration, explanation, or matter of rhetorical interest; whether and how to draw a distinction between inductive analogies and a priori analogies; and whether a priori analogies should be reconstructed as deductively valid arguments. The discussion will explore broader th…Read more
  •  6
  •  2
    Duane L. Cady, From Warism to Pacifism: A Moral Continuum (review)
    Philosophy in Review 11 (2): 91-94. 1991.
  •  15
    On Adler On Charity
    Informal Logic 4 (3). 1981.
  •  27
  •  16
    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.
  •  92
    The promise and pitfalls of apology
    with Wilhelm Verwoerd
    Journal of Social Philosophy 33 (1). 2002.
  •  134
    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.
  •  1
    Jonathan E. Adler, Beliefs Own Ethics (review)
    Philosophy in Review 23 157-159. 2003.
  •  16
    Did the world change on September 11, 2001? For those who live outside of New York or Washington, life's familiar pace persists and families and jobs resume their routines. Yet everything seems different because of the dramatic disturbance in our sense of what our world means and how we exist within it. In A Delicate Balance , philosopher Trudy Govier writes that it is because our feelings and attitudes have altered so fundamentally that our world has changed. Govier believes that there are ethi…Read more
  •  31
  •  73
    What is a good argument?
    Metaphilosophy 23 (4): 393-409. 1992.
  •  5
    20. Emotion, Relevance, and Consolation Arguments
    In Kent A. Peacock & Andrew D. Irvine (eds.), Mistakes of reason: essays in honour of John Woods, University of Toronto Press. pp. 364-379. 2005.
  •  32
    Who Says There Are No Fallacies?
    Informal Logic 5 (1). 1983.