Seminario del Dpto. de Lógica, Historia y Filosofía de la ciencia (UNED)

LUNES 25 DE ABRIL, 12:00  (Sala de reuniones de la biblioteca, 7ª
planta, Senda del Rey 5)

James Freeman (CUNY): "Understanding connection adequacy"


When are the premises and conclusion of an argument so related that the acceptability of the premises is transferred to the conclusion? To answer this question, one must first recognize the warrant of the argument in Toulmin’s sense: a rule licencing a move from premises of a certain sort to a conclusion of a certain sort. To justify that the warrant establishes adequate connection, one must next recognize the warrant’s type. We distinguish four, based on two dichotomous divisions: between conclusive and defeasible warrants, a logical distinction, and between warrants backed a priori and warrants backed a posteriori, an epistemological distinction. We argue that the connection adequacy conditions for defeasible warrants may be derived from L. J. Cohen’s account of the method of relevant variables in The Probable and the Provable. We sketch this method and how it may give us an account of connection adequacy for inductive and moral arguments with defeasible warrants.