The Exclusion Argument

Yaron Senderowicz*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapterpeer-review

Abstract

In Controversies and the Metaphysics of Mind, I pointed out the epistemic merits of philosophical (metaphysical) controversies by examining a type of argument that is often used in philosophical controversies – the Relevant Controversial Alternative argument. Arguments belonging to this type aim to point out the relevance of the arguer’s position to the content of the opponent’s radically opposed position. An exchange that consists of Relevant Controversial Alternative arguments and responses to them is a cooperative intellectual project binding the representatives of competing positions together. Exclusion arguments are motivated by the opposite goal. These are arguments that aim to undermine the relevance of a radically opposed position to the content and goals of the position that one supports, that is, they aim to isolate one’s position from the opposed one. In this chapter I examine the nature of Exclusion arguments and, in particular, the rational (epistemic) motivation to use them.

Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationPerspectives on Theory of Controversies and the Ethics of Communication
Subtitle of host publicationExplorations of Marcelo Dascal's Contributions to Philosophy
EditorsDana Riesenfeld, Giovanni Scarafile
Place of PublicationDordrecht
PublisherSpringer
Pages19-28
Number of pages10
ISBN (Electronic)9789400771314
ISBN (Print)9789400771307, 9789402401196
DOIs
StatePublished - 2014

Publication series

NameLogic, Argumentation and Reasoning
Volume2
ISSN (Print)2214-9120
ISSN (Electronic)2214-9139

Keywords

  • Arguments
  • Controversies
  • Dascal
  • Kant
  • Philosophical controversies
  • Rationality
  • The pragmatics of controversies

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'The Exclusion Argument'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this