A Defense of Non-deductive Reconstructions of Analogical Arguments (AILACT Essay Competition Winner)

Authors

  • Marcello Guarini University of Windsor

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.22329/il.v24i2.2141

Keywords:

analogical arguments, K. Crenshaw, deductive and non-deductive reconstruction, ethics, T. Govier, law, B.N. Waller

Abstract

Bruce Waller has defended a deductive reconstruction of the kinds of analogical arguments found in ethics, law, and metaphysics. This paper demonstrates the limits of such a reconstruction and argues for an alternative. non-deductive reconstruction. It will be shown that some analogical arguments do not fit Waller's deductive schema, and that such a schema does not allow for an adequate account of the strengths and weaknesses of an analogical argument. The similarities and differences between the account defended herein and the Trudy Govier's account are discussed as well.

Downloads

Published

2004-01-01

Issue

Vol. 24 No. 2 (2004)

Section

Articles

License

Copyright for each article published in Informal Logic belongs to its author(s). Informal Logic has the right of first publication. Permission to reprint any article that appears in Informal Logic MUST be obtained in writing from the author(s). In addition to any form of acknowledgement required by the author(s), the following notice must be added to the statement of copyright permission made in the reprint (with the appropriate numbers replacing the ellipses): [Article Title] was originally published in Informal Logic, [year], Volume ..., Number ..., pp. ...-... .