Analogical Argument Schemes and Complex Argument Structure

Abstract

This paper addresses several issues in argumentation theory. The over-arching goal is to discuss how a theory of analogical argument schemes fits the pragmadialectical theory of argument schemes and argument structures, and how one should properly reconstruct both single and complex argumentation by analogy. I also propose a unified model that explains how formal valid deductive argumentation relates to argument schemes in general and to analogical argument schemes in particular. The model suggests "scheme-specificvalidity" i.e. that there are contrasting species of validity for each type of argument scheme that derive from one generic conception of validity. Résumé

The Cumulative Force of Analogies

“…3 Juthe [2015] shows time and again that the comparison is necessary and seems to think that this tells conclusively against deductivism, but it does not, as mentioned above. It might be objected that although Waller's scheme refers to a, it does not explicitly have a comparison claim between a and b as a premise.…”

“…This is one of the things that Govier [1987] says distinguishes a priori analogies from other arguments by analogy, and most of the accounts that I will consider, of all types, attempt to account for this feature. However, I think that Juthe's [2015] account does not, and that he successfully challenges the intuition that it should; indeed, one of the great merits of his paper is in showing how in complex argumentation this intuition can be misleading, even when the particular to particular inference appears to be conclusive on its own and not to be affected by further cases. It is this in the end that I will take to be decisive against deductivism, because it is difficult for a deductivist account to explain this and it is quite likely incompatible with deductivism; it is unclear, though, whether this concession favours a sui generis approach over the inductivist approach, as I hope to show.…”

“…In this paper I will argue that most objections to deductive analyses of a priori analogies are incorrect, often involve basic misinterpretations of what the deductive reconstruction of those arguments are saying, and sometimes also betray a confusion about what part of the reasoning corresponds to the analogical inference. In particular, I will be focusing on a raft of objections made by Juthe in [2015] and subject his alternative views to criticism.…”

“…Juthe's sui generis schema [Juthe, 2005[Juthe, , 2015 In a recent paper Juthe (2015) gives the form of the argument as: (Standpoint) The Target-Subject TS has the Assigned-Predicate AP * .…”

“…It is just a fact about the world that gets expressed in the premises. Juthe [2015] gives several kinds of 'determining' relations that could cash out the meaning of "in virtue of" in different arguments; it is a mistake, though, to identify this with the analogical inference. Freeman [2013, pp.…”