Hubert Marraud
Biographic Data
| ID | 4495412 |
|---|---|
| NAME | Hubert Marraud |
| GIVEN NAMES | Hubert |
| FAMILY NAME | Marraud |
| SIGNATURE | MARRAUD H |
| AFFILIATIONS | Universidad Autónoma de Madrid |
| ORCID | 0000-0003-4039-1010 |
| VERIFIED | Yes |
| TOTAL WORKS | 9 |
| TOTAL CITATIONS | 0 |
| AUTHOR COUNT | 9 |
| EDITOR COUNT | 0 |
| FIRST PUBLICATION YEAR | 1993 |
| LATEST PUBLICATION YEAR | 2025 |
| H-INDEX | 0 |
A Case for a Reasons-Based Theory of Argument
A very basic intuition is that argumentation is about giving reasons. This is recognized, for example, when it is stated that the object of study of argumentation theory is argumentative practices that consist, in whole or in part, but, at least, to a significant extent, of asking for, giving, and examining reasons. But this consensus does not translate into theory. In fact, reasons occupy a modest place in argumentation theory. Logical propertie…
How Philosophers Argue: An Adversarial Collaboration on the Russell--Copleston Debate
An Unconscious Universal in the Mind is Like an Immaterial Dinner in the Stomach. A Debate on Logical Generalism (1914–1919)
The debate on the a fortiori and the universal that took place between April 1914 and April 1919 in the journal Mind has a double interest for argumentation theorists. First, the discussion is an example of a philosophical polylogue that exhibits the characteristics of a quasi-engaged dialogue (Blair Blair, J. A. (2012 [1998]). “The Limits of the Dialogue Model of Argument”. Argumentation 12, pp. 325–339. Reprinted in J.A. Blair, Groundwork in th…
Argumentation in Philosophical Controversies
Anyone interested in philosophical argumentation should be prepared to study philosophical debates and controversies because it is an intensely dialogical, and even contentious, genre of argumentation. There is hardly any other way to do them justice. This is the reason why the present special issue addresses philosophical argumentation within philosophical debates. Of the six articles in this special issue, one deals with a technical aspect, the…
How Philosophers Argue: An Adversarial Collaboration on the Russell--Copleston Debate
Deliberación e identidad colectiva. Usos compromisorios, directivos y expresivos de la argumentación
La concepción predominante de la argumentación sigue privilegiando la dimensión representacional del lenguaje y, en consecuencia, ignora o infravalora las funciones compromisorias, directivas o expresivas de la argumentación. En este artículo examino los usos de la argumentación en la esfera pública -con especial atención a la deliberación y a la negociación- para poner de manifiesto y reivindicar la importancia de las funciones no persuasivas de…
Sobre La Definición De Los Argumentos Conductivos
Wellman introdujo el razonamiento conductivo en 1971 para distinguirlo del razonamiento deductivo y del razonamiento inductivo. Para la mayoría de los comentaristas lo que define al razonamiento conductivo es la ponderación de los pros y los contras. Sostengo, sin embargo, que la ponderación está asociada con determinadas estructuras argumentativas, mientras que “conductivo” se refiere a la relación entre las premisas y la conclusión de un argume…
Razonamiento aproximado y grados de consecuencia
_
Lógicas modales proposicionales normales sin interpolación
No prominent works on this page.
Lógicas modales proposicionales normales sin interpolación
Razonamiento aproximado y grados de consecuencia
_
Sobre La Definición De Los Argumentos Conductivos
Wellman introdujo el razonamiento conductivo en 1971 para distinguirlo del razonamiento deductivo y del razonamiento inductivo. Para la mayoría de los comentaristas lo que define al razonamiento conductivo es la ponderación de los pros y los contras. Sostengo, sin embargo, que la ponderación está asociada con determinadas estructuras argumentativas, mientras que “conductivo” se refiere a la relación entre las premisas y la conclusión de un argume…
Deliberación e identidad colectiva. Usos compromisorios, directivos y expresivos de la argumentación
La concepción predominante de la argumentación sigue privilegiando la dimensión representacional del lenguaje y, en consecuencia, ignora o infravalora las funciones compromisorias, directivas o expresivas de la argumentación. En este artículo examino los usos de la argumentación en la esfera pública -con especial atención a la deliberación y a la negociación- para poner de manifiesto y reivindicar la importancia de las funciones no persuasivas de…
How Philosophers Argue: An Adversarial Collaboration on the Russell--Copleston Debate
An Unconscious Universal in the Mind is Like an Immaterial Dinner in the Stomach. A Debate on Logical Generalism (1914–1919)
The debate on the a fortiori and the universal that took place between April 1914 and April 1919 in the journal Mind has a double interest for argumentation theorists. First, the discussion is an example of a philosophical polylogue that exhibits the characteristics of a quasi-engaged dialogue (Blair Blair, J. A. (2012 [1998]). “The Limits of the Dialogue Model of Argument”. Argumentation 12, pp. 325–339. Reprinted in J.A. Blair, Groundwork in th…
Argumentation in Philosophical Controversies
Anyone interested in philosophical argumentation should be prepared to study philosophical debates and controversies because it is an intensely dialogical, and even contentious, genre of argumentation. There is hardly any other way to do them justice. This is the reason why the present special issue addresses philosophical argumentation within philosophical debates. Of the six articles in this special issue, one deals with a technical aspect, the…
How Philosophers Argue: An Adversarial Collaboration on the Russell--Copleston Debate
A Case for a Reasons-Based Theory of Argument
A very basic intuition is that argumentation is about giving reasons. This is recognized, for example, when it is stated that the object of study of argumentation theory is argumentative practices that consist, in whole or in part, but, at least, to a significant extent, of asking for, giving, and examining reasons. But this consensus does not translate into theory. In fact, reasons occupy a modest place in argumentation theory. Logical propertie…
Philosophy (7 works) · Epistemology (4 works) · Sociology (4 works) · Communication studies (3 works) · Multi-Agent Systems and Negotiation (3 works) · Social science (3 works) · Argumentation theory (2 works) · Dialogical self (2 works) · Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics (2 works) · Humanities (2 works)