The aim of this paper is to defend the claim that arguments are truth-directed, and to discuss the role that truth plays in the evaluation of arguments that are truth-directed. It concludes that the proper place of truth is in the metatheory in terms of which a theory of evaluation is to be worked out, rather than in the theory of evaluation itself as a constraint on premise adequacy. © Patrick Bondy.
CITATION STYLE
Bondy, P. (2010). Truth and argument evaluation. Informal Logic, 30(2), 142–158. https://doi.org/10.22329/il.v30i2.2931
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.