Abstract
Virtue argumentation theory (VAT) has been charged of being incomplete, given its alleged inability to account for argument cogency in virtue-theoretical terms. Instead of defending VAT against that challenge, I suggest it is misplaced, since it is based on a premise VAT does not endorse, and raises an issue that most versions of VAT need not consider problematic. This in turn allows distinguishing several varieties of VAT, and clarifying what really matters for them.
Author supplied keywords
Cite
CITATION STYLE
Paglieri, F. (2015). Bogency and Goodacies: On Argument Quality in Virtue Argumentation Theory. Informal Logic, 35(1), 65–87. https://doi.org/10.22329/IL.V35I1.4209
Register to see more suggestions
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.