Scholarlink

To understand in general how an argument gets from its premisesPremise to its conclusion requires discerning its warrantWarrant or inference licenceInference licence. To discern whether the premisesPremise, if acceptable, render the conclusionConclusion acceptable requires evaluating the warrantWarrant. However, does every argument involve a warrantWarrant? ToulminToulmin, Stephen contrasts warrantWarrant usingArgumentwarrant using and warrant establishingArgumentwarrant establishing arguments. Taking the corresponding (universal) generalization of a warrant as the conclusionConclusion of an argument to a warrant, the paradigm of such arguments is inductive enumerationInductive enumeration. For now, let us assume there are these two classes of arguments, with arguments from warrants being principal. Our presented survey of a number of authors reveals no further type. Inferences to best explanationExplanation require special attention. We argue that they have warrantsWarrant once we introduce a plausibility function “Pl” into our object language. “Pl” maps statements into a partially ordered set of plausibilityPlausibility values. The best explanationExplanation is the most plausible explanationExplanation. If there are k possible explanationsExplanation of an event E, k ≥ 1, if Pl(E/Hi ≥ Pl(E/Hj) 1 ≤ j ≤ k, Hi is the best explanationExplanation of E.

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Connection Adequacy and the Concept of Warrant

  • 章节

  • 发表日期：

    2025年

查看全文
  • James B. Freeman

摘要

To understand in general how an argument gets from its premisesPremise to its conclusion requires discerning its warrantWarrant or inference licenceInference licence. To discern whether the premisesPremise, if acceptable, render the conclusionConclusion acceptable requires evaluating the warrantWarrant. However, does every argument involve a warrantWarrant? ToulminToulmin, Stephen contrasts warrantWarrant usingArgumentwarrant using and warrant establishingArgumentwarrant establishing arguments. Taking the corresponding (universal) generalization of a warrant as the conclusionConclusion of an argument to a warrant, the paradigm of such arguments is inductive enumerationInductive enumeration. For now, let us assume there are these two classes of arguments, with arguments from warrants being principal. Our presented survey of a number of authors reveals no further type. Inferences to best explanationExplanation require special attention. We argue that they have warrantsWarrant once we introduce a plausibility function “Pl” into our object language. “Pl” maps statements into a partially ordered set of plausibilityPlausibility values. The best explanationExplanation is the most plausible explanationExplanation. If there are k possible explanationsExplanation of an event E, k ≥ 1, if Pl(E/Hi ≥ Pl(E/Hj) 1 ≤ j ≤ k, Hi is the best explanationExplanation of E.