No abstract

No abstract

Argument-giving reasons for a view-is our model of rational dispute resolution. Fogelin (1985) suggests that certain "deep" disagreements cannot be resolved in this way because features of their context "undercut the conditions essential to arguing" (p. 5). In this paper we add some detail to Fogelin's treatment of intractable disagreements. In doing so we distinguish between his relatively modest claim that some disputes cannot be resolved through argument and his more radical claim that such disputes are beyond rational resolution. This distinction, along with some ofthe detail we add to Fogelin's treatment, sheds some useful light on the project of informal logic.Resume: L'argumentation-Ia proposition de raisons pour soutenir un jugement-est notre modele de resolution de desaccord. Fogelin (1985) suggere que certains des accords «pro fonds» ne peuvent pas se n:soudre par I' argu-mentation parce que des aspects d'un contexte de contestation «etouffent les conditions necessaires de I'argumentation» (p. 5). Dans cet article no us ajoutons des details a I'approche de Fogelin sur les des accords difficiles a resoudre. Nous distinguons son opinIOn relativement modeste que I 'argumentation ne peut pas Tt:soudre certains des accords et son opinion plus radicale que de tels des accords son! au-dela de resolutions rationnelles. Cette distinction ainsi que d'autres informations sur I'approche de Fogelin eclairent d'avantage Ie projet de la logique non formelle.

No abstract

No abstract