The Virtues of Argument - Florida Institute of Technologymy.fit.edu › ~aberdein ›...

The Virtues of Argument

Andrew Aberdein

Florida Institute of [email protected]

my.fit.edu/~aberdein

Joint Session, University of Bristol, 8th July 2007

Andrew Aberdein The Virtues of Argument

[email protected]

my.fit.edu/~aberdein

Aristotle’s Moral Virtues

Irascibility←− Gentleness −→ SpiritlessnessRashness←− Courage −→ Cowardice

Shamelessness←− Modesty −→ DiffidenceProfligacy←− Temperance −→ Insensitiveness

Envy←− Righteous Indignation −→ [Malice]Profit←− The Just −→ Loss

Prodigality←− Liberality −→ MeannessBoastfulness←− Sincerity −→ Self-depreciation

Flattery←− Friendliness −→ SurlinessSubservience←− Dignity −→ Stubbornness

Luxuriousness←− Hardiness −→ EnduranceVanity←− Greatness of Spirit −→ Smallness of Spirit

Extravagance←− Magnificence −→ ShabbinessRascality←− Wisdom −→ Simpleness

Eudemian Ethics 1220b–1221a.


Aristotle’s Intellectual Virtues:

knowledge;art;prudence;intuition;wisdom.

Nicomachean Ethics, Book VI


Modern Virtue Epistemology:

Sosa/Greco/Goldman:sight;hearing;introspection;memory;deduction;induction.

Heather Battaly, 2000, ‘What is Virtue Epistemology?’ In Proceedings of theTwentieth World Congress of Philosophy.


Zagzebski’s Intellectual Virtues:

the ability to recognize the salient facts;

sensitivity to detail;

open-mindedness in collecting and appraising evidence;

fairness in evaluating the arguments of others;

intellectual humility;

intellectual perseverance, diligence, care and thoroughness;

adaptability of intellect;

the detective’s virtues: thinking of coherent explanations of the facts;

being able to recognize reliable authority;

insight into persons, problems, theories;

the teaching virtues: the social virtues of being communicative,including intellectual candour and knowing your audience and how theyrespond;

intellectual courage, autonomy, boldness, creativity, and inventiveness.

Linda Zagzebski, 1996, Virtues of the Mind, pp. 114, 220, 225.


Universality

Brahma Viharas (Divine abiding practices) of Buddhism:

metta (loving-kindness);karuna (compassion);muddita (appreciative joy);uppeka (equanimity).

Two worries:1 Incommensurability?2 ‘Local’ virtues?


Applicability

When I started off my career in defended divorce cases I greatly admired thesmooth and elegant advocacy of Lord Salmon, who . . . seemed to me to winhis cases with all the noise and bluster of a perfectly tuned Rolls-Roycecoasting down hill. Cyril Salmon would take out his more valuablepossessions, his gold watch and chain, his heavy gold key-ring and cigarette-lighter, and place them on the bench in front of him. Then he would . . .plunge his hands deep into his trouser pockets and stroll negligently up anddown the front bench lobbing faultlessly accurate questions over his shoulderat the witness-box. Here, I thought, was a style to imitate. For my earlycross-examinations I would . . . take off my battered Timex watch, lug out mybundle of keys held together with a piece of frayed string and pace up anddown firing off what I hope were appropriate questions backwards. Icontinued with this technique until an unsympathetic Judge said, ‘Do try andkeep still Mr Mortimer. It’s like watching ping-pong.’

John Mortimer, 1984, Clinging to the Wreckage, p. 96.


Status of Arguments

Must agent-based appraisal of argumentation commit the adhominem fallacy?

Ad Hominem Arguments

consist in bringing alleged facts about Jones to bear in anattempt to influence hearers’ attitudes toward Jones’sadvocacy-of-P

Alan Brinton, 1995, ‘The ad hominem’, in Hansen & Pinto, Fallacies, p. 214.

But are all instances of ad hominem necessarily fallacious?


Ad Hominem: An Experiment

Here is an open conjecture:

Conjecture. Somewhere in the decimal expansion of π thereare one million sevens in a row.

Here is a heuristic argument about the claim:

. . .

After having read this argument please say to what extent youare persuaded by it:

not persuaded 1 2 3 4 5 totally persuaded

Matthew Inglis & Juan Pablo Mejia-Ramos, 2006, ‘Is it ever appropriate tojudge an argument by its author?’, Proceedings of the British Society for

Research into Learning Mathematics 26(2), p. 44.


Ad Hominem: An Experiment

Here is an open conjecture:

Conjecture. Somewhere in the decimal expansion of π thereare one million sevens in a row.

Here is a heuristic argument about the claim (taken from a talkby Prof. Timothy Gowers, University of Cambridge):

. . .

After having read this argument please say to what extent youare persuaded by it:

not persuaded 1 2 3 4 5 totally persuaded

Matthew Inglis & Juan Pablo Mejia-Ramos, 2006, ‘Is it ever appropriate tojudge an argument by its author?’, Proceedings of the British Society for

Research into Learning Mathematics 26(2), p. 44.


Zagzebski’s Intellectual Virtues:

the ability to recognize the salient facts;

sensitivity to detail;

open-mindedness in collecting and appraising evidence;

fairness in evaluating the arguments of others;

intellectual humility;

intellectual perseverance, diligence, care and thoroughness;

adaptability of intellect;

the detective’s virtues: thinking of coherent explanations of the facts;

being able to recognize reliable authority;

insight into persons, problems, theories;

the teaching virtues: the social virtues of being communicative,including intellectual candour and knowing your audience and how theyrespond;

intellectual courage, autonomy, boldness, creativity, and inventiveness.

Linda Zagzebski, 1996, Virtues of the Mind, pp. 114, 220, 225.


Daniel Cohen’s Argumentational Virtues

Deaf dogmatist Eager Believer [Quietism]↑ ↑ ↑

Willingness to Willingness to Willingness toListen Question Engage↓ ↓ ↓

Concessionaire Unassuring ArgumentAssurer Provocateur

Daniel Cohen, 2005, ‘Arguments that backfire’, in Hitchcock & Farr, The Usesof Argument.


Virtues vs. Skills

An Aristotelian Distinction . . .In the matter of arts and skills, they say, voluntary error ispreferable to involuntary error, while in the matter of virtues . . .it is the reverse.

Philippa Foot, 1978, Virtues and Vices, p. 7.

. . . Applied to Argument

Virtue : Skill :: Sophism : Paralogism


Summary

Virtue theory is a potentially fruitful methodology forinformal logic;Addresses recurring problems at least as satisfactorily asother virtue theories;Exploits under-utilized virtue/skill distinction.

Future work:Analyses of individual virtues;Systematic basis for appeals to moral obligations inreasoning.


The Virtues of Argument - Florida Institute of Technologymy.fit.edu › ~aberdein ›...

Documents

Transcript of The Virtues of Argument - Florida Institute of Technologymy.fit.edu › ~aberdein ›...