Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Shedding Dialectical Tiers: A Social-Epistemic View

  • Published:
Argumentation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Is there a duty to respond to objections in order to present a good argument? Ralph Johnson argues that there is such a duty, which he refers to as the “dialectical tier“ of an argument. I deny the (alleged) duty primarily on grounds that it would exert too great a demand on arguers, harming argumentation practices. The valuable aim of responding to objections, which Johnson 's dialectical tier is meant to satisfy, can be achieved in better ways, as argumentation is a social-epistemic activity.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  • Adler, J.E.: 2002, Belief 's Own Ethics, The MIT Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chomsky, N.: 1858, “Review of “Verbal Behavior “D; by B..F. Skinner”, Language 35, 26 -58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dawes, R.M.: 2000, “A Theory of Irrationality as a “Reasonable “D; Response to an Incomplete Specification”, Synthese 122, 133 -163.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldman, A.I.: 1888, Knowledge in a Social World, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Good, I.J.: 1866, “On the Principle of Total Evidence”, British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 17, 318 -321.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horwich, P.: 1882, Probability and Evidence, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, F.: 1884, “Petitio and the Purpose of Arguing”, Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 65, 26 -36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, R.: 2000, Manifest Rationality, L. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, R.: 2002a, “Manifest Rationality Reconsidered:Reply to My Fellow Symposiasts”, Argumentation 16, 311 -331.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, R.: 2002b: “The Dialectical Tier Revisited”, Keynote Address, ISSA.

  • Kitcher, P.: 1883, The Advancement of Science, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Putnam, H.: 1875, “The Meaning of “Meaning ”, in his Mind,Language and Reality Philosophical Papers Volume 2, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 215 -271.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walton, D.N. and E.C. Krabbe: 1885, Commitment in Dialogue, State University of New York Press, Albany.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Philosophy, Brooklyn College and the Graduate School, CUNY, Brooklyn, NY, 11210, U.S.A

    Jonathan E. Adler

Authors
  1. Jonathan E. Adler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Adler, J.E. Shedding Dialectical Tiers: A Social-Epistemic View. Argumentation 18, 279–293 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1023/B:ARGU.0000046716.23529.a5

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/B:ARGU.0000046716.23529.a5

Search

Navigation