- The Distinctiveness Problem of Analogical Arguments
- Arguments from Fairness and Extensive Interpretation in Greek Judicial Rhetoric
- Generative AI and Argument Creativity
- What Makes an Argument Strong?
- A Reaction to Critique from the Epistemological Sidelines
- In Memoriam Michael Scriven
- That Obscure Object of (Philosophical) Desire
- Justifying the Epistemological Theory of Argumentation
- Virtues Suffice for Argument Evaluation
- Arguing with Arguments
- Do We Really Not Know What Toulmin’s Analytic Arguments Are?
- In Memoriam Catherine Hundleby
- A Case Study of Contextual and Emotional Modulation of Source-case Selection in Analogical Arguments
- Are Fallacies Frequent ?
- Fact and Opinion
- Group Identity in Public Deliberation
- Rational Thinking and Intellectually Virtuous Thinking: Identical, Extensionally Equivalent, or Substantively Different?
- The Something Called the ‘False Dilemma Fallacy’ (FDF): A Return to Formalization Just This Time
- Educating for Good Thinking: Virtues, Skills, or Both?
- Intellectual Virtue in Critical Thinking and Its Instruction
- The Basic Components of Agreement
- Bad Arguments and Objectively Bad Arguments
- Review of How Philosophers Argue: An Adversarial Collaboration on the Russell-Copleston Debate
- Sequencing Critical Moves for Ethical Argumentation Practice: Munāẓara and the Interdependence of Procedure and Agent
- The Broad Reach of Multivariable Thinking
- Whataboutisms: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
- Characterizing Reflective Diary Writing as an Argumentative Activity Type
- A Network of Argumentation Schemes and Critical Questions
- You Cannot Judge an Argument by its Closure
- On Numerical Arguments in Policymaking
- Argumentation by Analogy and Weighing of Reasons
- Multi-Modal 2020
- Kisceral Argumentation in Law
- Logics for “Non-Logical” Argumentation
- Gilbert as Disrupter
- Amenable Argumentation Approach
- On the Kisceral Mode of Argumentation
- Reflections on the Physical or Visceral Mode of Argumentation in Michael Gilbert’s Theory of Multi-Modal Argumentation and its Relation to Gesture Studies and The Embodied Mind
- Deeper into Argumentative Bullshit
- Identifying Linked and Convergent Argument Structures
- Argumentative Hyperbole as Fallacy
- A Modal Criterion for Epistemic Argumentation
- A Pragmatic Account of Rephrase in Argumentation
- Is Every Definition Persuasive?
- Douglas Walton’s Contributions in Education
- Argumentation Profiles
- Argumentation as a Collaborative Enterprise
- An Epistemological Appraisal of Walton’s Argument Schemes
- Burdens of Proposing
- The Distinction Between False Dilemma and False Disjunctive Syllogism
- Discovering Warrants in Political Argumentation
- Reflections on Minimal Adversariality
- A Simple Theory of Argument Schemes
- On Appeals to Non-existent Authorities as Arguments from Analogy
- Metaphorical Argumentation
- The Hermeneutic Priority of Which Question?
- Argumentative Bullshit
- Inference Claims as Assertions
- Argumentation and Fiction
- Act or Object
- Illocutionary Performance and Objective Assessment in the Speech Act of Arguing
- Speech Act Pluralism in Argumentative Polylogues
- Introduction to the Special Issue on Speech Acts and Argumentation
- Argumentation and Persistent Disagreement
- Decoupling Representations and the Chain of Arguments
- Argumentation Ab Homine in Philosophy
- Credible as Evidence? Multilayered Audience Reception of Narrative Arguments
- Metaphilosophy and Argument: The Case of the Justification of Abduction
- “Argument and Social Justice” and “Reasoning for Change”
- “I Said What I Said”—Black Women and Argumentative Politeness Norms
- Picturing a Thousand Unspoken Words
- Deep Disagreement and Patience as an Argumentative Virtue
- Some Limits to Arguing Virtuously
- Youth Voting, Rational Competency, and Epistemic Injustice
- Exploring the Effect of a Scaffolding Design on Students’ Argument Critique Skills
- Putting Reasons in their Place
- Is it Permissible to Teach Buddhist Mindfulness Meditation in a Critical Thinking Course?
- Good and Bad Reasoning about COVID-19
- What is Wrong with Deductivism?
- Review of Narration as Argument, edited by Paula Olmos
- An Unlikely Source of (Absurd and Effective) Case Studies for Introductory Informal Logic
- Resolution of Deep Disagreement: Not Simply Consensus
- CAT Scan: A Critical Review of the Critical-Thinking Assessment Test
- Rooting Gilbert’s Multi-Modal Argumentation in Jung, and Its Extension to Law
- Source Related Argumentation Found in Science Websites
- Justifying Particular Reasoning in a Legal Context
- Other-Regarding Virtues and Their Place in Virtue Argumentation Theory
- Evidence, Persuasion and Diversity
- The Role of Trust in Argumentation
- Should Climate Scientists Fly?
- On Presumptions, Burdens of Proof, and Explanations
- Proposal of a Classification of Analogies
- Come Now, Let Us Reason Together
- Profiles of Dialogue for Amphiboly
- Review of Truth in Fiction: Rethinking its Logic
- Review of Argumentation Theory: A Pragma-Dialectical Perspective
- Adversariality and Argumentation
- Emotions in Argumentative Narration
- Emotive Figures as “Shown” Emotion in Italian Post-Unification Conduct Books (1860-1900)
- Emotions, Argumentation and Argumentativity
- Tense Arguments
- Argumentative Strategies and Stylistic Devices
- The Rhetorical and Argumentative Relevance of “Extreme Consequence” in Advertising
- Old Delivery and Modern Demagogy
- Frozen
- New Board Members
- Robert Pinto
- Educating Students to Consistency via Argumentation
- Emotive Meaning in Political Argumentation
- Pressure and Argumentation in Public Controversies
- Informalizing Formal Logic
- Is an Appeal to Popularity a Fallacy of Popularity?
- The Appraisal of Conductions
- You Will Respect My Authoritah!? A Reply to Botting
- Rhetoric and Logical Reasoning as Engagement with Being
- A Dialectical View on Conduction: Reasons, Warrants, and Normal Suasory Inclinations
- Argumentation As Critically Oriented Pedagogical Dialogue
- Arguing with Images as Extended Cognition
- Two Types of Argument from Position to Know
- The Value of Methodological Deductivism in Argument Construction
- The Analysis of Implicit Premises within Children’s Argumentative Inferences
- Can we translate sounds into words? A response to Leo Groarke`’s “Auditory Arguments: The Logic of ‘Sound’ Arguments”
- On Appeals to Nature and their Use in the Public Controversy over Genetically Modified Organisms
- Deep Disagreement and the Virtues of Argumentative and Epistemic Incapacity
- Where Do Sounds Fit Within Informal Logic?
- Response to Groarke : Figuring Sound
- Auditory Arguments: The Logic of ‘Sound’ Arguments
- Notice of Books Received
- The Epistemic Value of Deep Disagreements
- Teaching as Abductive Reasoning: The Role of Argumentation
- Announcement: New Policy
- Analogical Arguments in Persuasive and Deliberative Contexts
- On Arguments from Ignorance
- The Social Nature of Argumentative Practices: The Philosophy of Argument and Audience Reception
- Critical Review: On Reasoning and Argument
- Donald Trump as a Critical-Thinking Teaching Assistant
- Fake News: A Definition
- Trump, Snakes and the Power of Fables
- Introduction to the Special Issue
- The Bullshit Doctrine: Fabrications, Lies, and Nonsense in the Age of Trump
- Replies to Commentators on The Concept of Argument: Clarifying Themes, Answering Questions, Settling Objections
- Argumentation Theory and Argumentative Practices: A Vital but Complex Relationship
- Critical Thinking, Bias and Feminist Philosophy: Building a Better Framework through Collaboration
- From the Editors
- Arguing with People
- Transsubjectivity
- Wohlrapp on the Criterial Side of Validity: Some Comments
- Wohlrapp’s concept of justification
- Issues of Logicism and Objectivity
- Does Rhetoric Have a Place in Wohlrapp’s Theory of Argument?
- Précis of The Concept of Argument. A Philosophical Foundation
- Editors’ Introduction
- Rethinking Rhetorical Theory, Criticism, and Pedagogy: The Living Art of Michael C. Leff
- Practical Argumentation as Reasoned Advocacy
- Steering into the Skid: On the Norms of Critical Thinking
- The Role of Others and Imagination in Reasoning and Argumentation: Improving our Critical Creative Capacity
- Others and Imagination in Reasoning and Argumentation: Improving our Critical Creative Capacity
- Critical Review of Arguing With People by Michael Gilbert
- Conductive Argument as a Mode of Strategic Maneuvering
- The Role of Quasi-Logical Arguments in Critical Dialogue: A Pragma-Dialectical Redefinition
- Argument or Explanation: Who is to Decide?
- Announcement
- Conductive Arguments: Why is This Still a Thing?
- Profiles of Dialogue for Relevance
- How to Disagree About Argument Schemes
- Clarifying our Ideas in Persuasion Dialogue
- A Searchable Bibliography of Fallacies – 2016
- Apologie de la polémique
- Errors of Reasoning, Naturalizing the Logic of Inference
- Evidence Assessment in Refugee Law with Stories and Arguments
- Administrative Judicial Decisions as a Hybrid Argumentative Activity Type
- Defining Marriage: Classification, Interpretation, and Definitional Disputes
- Redundancy of Redundancy in Justifications of Verdicts of Polish The Constitutional Tribuna
- An Epistemological Theory of Argumentation for Adversarial Legal Proceedings
- Anything Goes: An Apology for Parallel Distributed Legal Science
- Preface: Methodologies for Research on Legal Argumentation
- Why Arguments from Expert Opinion are still Weak: A Reply to Seidel
- Considering Carneades as a Framework for Informal Logic: A Reply to Walton and Gordon
- Criticism without Fundamental Principles
- Employing and Exploiting the Presumptions of Communication in Argumentation: An Application of Normative Pragmatics
- Studying Rhetorical Audiences – a Call for Qualitative Reception Studies in Argumentation and Rhetoric
- Latin American Philosophers: Some Recent Challenges to Their Intellectual Character
- The Real Struggle: An Objective Notion of Expertise?
- Enhancing Rationality: Heuristics, Biases, and The Critical Thinking Project
- Being a Correct Presumption vs. Being Presumably the Case
- In Memoriam: Richard Paul
- Reflections on Theoretical Issues in Argumentation Theory. Editors Frans H. van Eemeren and Bart Garssen (Eds.). Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2015; pp. 289. $139.00 eBook, $179.00 hardcover.
- An Early Exchange on the Interpretation of Arguments in Texts
- Developing Critical Thinking with Debate: Evidence from Iranian Male and Female Students
- Denying the Antecedent: The Fallacy That Never Was, or Sometimes Isn’t?
- Mizrahi and Seidel: Experts in Confusion.
- Formalizing Informal Logic
- On Novels as Arguments
- Arguing as a Virtuous Arguer Would Argue
- Virtues, Evidence, and Ad Hominem Arguments
- Argumentation & Health, Rubinelli & Snoeck Henkemans (Eds.)
- Remembering Richard Paul
- A Computational Model of Pragma-dialectics as a Tool for its Analysis and Evaluation
- Inference, Circularity, and Begging the Question
- The Argument Form “Appeal to Galileo”: A Critical Appreciation of Doury’s Account
- The Argument Form “Appeal to Galileo”: A Critical Appreciation of Doury’s Account
- Analogical Argument Schemes and Complex Argument Structure
- The Basic Slippery Slope Argument
- Sensitizing Reasons by Emulating Exemplars
- Critical Thinking and Cognitive Bias
- Argumentation, rationality, and psychology of reasoning
- Steps Towards an Evolutionary Account of Argumentative Competence
- Denying Antecedents and Affirming Consequents: The State of the Art