Philosophical commitments implicit in the translation-calculation analysis of informal arguments
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.51359/2357-9986.2025.263844Keywords:
informal logic, Epistemology of Logic, vaguenessAbstract
If we assume that formal Logic can contribute to the analysis procedures of informal Logic, one of its contributions is the translation-calculation strategy, which seems to be very common in the teaching of Logic. I argue that this translation strategy presupposes the adoption of a theory of vagueness, even if tacitly. I also argue that the teaching of Logic, by resorting to translation-design as a pedagogical tool, adopts semantic nihilism as its theory of vagueness. I also argue that choosing one theory of vagueness over another is a gesture with possibly relevant logical (formal) repercussions. I illustrate this point by comparing semantic nihilism to supervaluationism, a theory of vagueness structurally similar to nihilism that, nevertheless, causes loss of truth-functionality. Finally, I raise some issues with a suspicion regarding the value of informal Logic as a discipline. This discussion does not intend to address in depth the philosophical problem of vagueness, or to evaluate the merits or lack thereof of semantic nihilism or supervaluationism as theories of vagueness. The aim is to contribute to the epistemology of Logic and to illustrate what sort of repercussion vagueness, and its theories, have on the relationship between formal and informal Logic.
References
BRAUN, D.; SIDER, T. Vague, So Untrue. Noûs, v. 41, n. 2, p. 133–156, 2007. Disponível em: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4494524.
CARNIELLI, W. A.; EPSTEIN, R. L. Pensamento crítico: O poder da lógica e da argumentação. 2. ed. São Paulo: Rideel, 2010.
ERICKSON, E. Anti-excepcionalismo e a metodologia da lógica. Perspectiva Filosófica, Recife, v. 47, n. 2, p. 502–528, 2020. DOI: http://doi.org/10.51359/2357-9986.2020.248948.
GROARKE, L. How to Define an Informal Logic. In: Rigour and reason: Essays in Honour of Hans Vilhelm Hansen. Edição: J. Anthony Blair e Christopher W. Tindale. Windsor: University of Windsor Press, 2020. P. 231–251. (Windsor Studies in Argumentation). Disponível em: https://windsor.scholarsportal.info/omp/index.php/wsia/catalog/book/180.
GROARKE, L. Informal Logic. In: ZALTA, E. N.; NODELMAN, U. (Ed.). The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Spring 2024. Stanford: Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University, 2024. Disponível em: https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2024/entries/logic-informal.
HAACK, S. Filosofia das lógicas. Tradução: Cezar A. Mortari e Luiz Henrique de Araújo Dutra. São Paulo: Editora UNESP, 2002.
HANSEN, H. V.; COHEN, D. H. Are there methods of informal logic? In: ZENKER, F. (Ed.). Argumentation: Community and Cognition. Proceedings of the 9th Conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation. Windsor: Centre for Research on Reasoning, Argumentation, and Rhetoric, 2012. P. 1–13. Disponível em: https://scholar.uwindsor.ca/ossaarchive/OSSA9/papersandcommentaries/15.
HINTIKKA, J. The role of logic in argumentation. en. The Monist, v. 72, n. 1, p. 3–24, 1989. Disponível em: https://www.jstor.org/stable/27903120.
KEEFE, R. Theories of vagueness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000. (Cambridge Studies in Philosophy).
LEWIŃSKI, M. The Straw Man and its Baby Semantics. In: Rigour and reason: Essays in Honour of Hans Vilhelm Hansen. Edição: J. Anthony Blair e Christopher W. Tindale. Windsor: University of Windsor Press, 2020. P. 276–303. (Windsor Studies in Argumen-
tation). Disponível em: https://windsor.scholarsportal.info/omp/index.php/wsia/catalog/book/180.
MORTARI, C. A. Introdução à lógica. São Paulo: Editora UNESP, 2001.
PUGLIESE, N. A continuidade entre os métodos formais e informais de demonstração na prática filosófica. Perspectiva Filosófica, Recife, v. 47, n. 2, p. 26–60, 2020. DOI: http://doi.org/10.51359/2357-9986.2020.246267.
WILLIAMSON, T. Vagueness. London, New York: Routledge, 1994.
WILLIAMSON, T.; SIMONS, P. Vagueness and ignorance. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Supplementary Volumes, v. 66, p. 145–177, 1992. Disponível em: https://www.jstor.org/stable/4106976.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Daniel Alves da Silva Lopes Diniz
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
A Revista Perspectiva Filosófica orienta seus procedimentos de gestão de artigos conforme as diretrizes básicas formuladas pelo Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq). http://memoria2.cnpq.br/web/guest/diretrizes/
Autores que publicam nesta revista concordam com os seguintes termos:
-
Os autores mantém os direitos autorais e concedem à revista o direito de primeira publicação, sendo o trabalho simultaneamente licenciado sob Creative Commons Atribuição 4.0 Internacional que permite o compartilhamento do trabalho com reconhecimento da autoria e publicação inicial nesta revista.
-
Os autores têm autorização para assumir contratos adicionais separadamente, para distribuição não-exclusiva da versão do trabalho publicada nesta revista, com reconhecimento de autoria e publicação inicial nesta revista (Consultar http://opcit.eprints.org/oacitation-biblio.html).
As obras publicadas pela Revista Perspectiva Filosófica estão licenciadas com Creative Commons Atribuição 4.0 Internacional.
