Logicznie poprawny argument tu quoque

IF 0.2 0 PHILOSOPHY HYBRIS Revista de Filosofia Pub Date : 2019-03-30 DOI:10.18778/1689-4286.44.03
Piotr M. Sękowski
{"title":"Logicznie poprawny argument tu quoque","authors":"Piotr M. Sękowski","doi":"10.18778/1689-4286.44.03","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The argument tu quoque is widely called a logical fallacy. The aim of this study is to show, that this theorem is ill-considered. The text is focused on the analysis of various examples of tu quoque . This analysis leads to the conclusion that there are logically correct tu quoque . There are giv-en some examples of such tu quoque . Main theorem of the article is that tu quoque is correct if it’ s used as some kind of mental shortcut refer-ring to other arguments.","PeriodicalId":30478,"journal":{"name":"HYBRIS Revista de Filosofia","volume":"75 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2019-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"HYBRIS Revista de Filosofia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18778/1689-4286.44.03","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The argument tu quoque is widely called a logical fallacy. The aim of this study is to show, that this theorem is ill-considered. The text is focused on the analysis of various examples of tu quoque . This analysis leads to the conclusion that there are logically correct tu quoque . There are giv-en some examples of such tu quoque . Main theorem of the article is that tu quoque is correct if it’ s used as some kind of mental shortcut refer-ring to other arguments.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
对quoque的论证被广泛地称为逻辑谬误。这项研究的目的是表明,这个定理是考虑不周的。本文的重点是对各种各样的例子进行分析。这种分析得出的结论是,存在逻辑上正确的quoque。这里有一些这样的例子。本文的主要定理是,如果一个论点被用作某种心理上的捷径,那么它就是正确的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
20 weeks
期刊最新文献
Teologiczne konsekwencje darwinizmu — „Bóg Darwina” Corneliusa G. Huntera Co to za świat? The Limits of Liberalism. Tradition, Individualism, and the crisis of freedom, Mark. T. Mitchell, University of Notre Dame Press, Indiana 2019, ss. 328 – Artykuł Recenzyjny Teoria interpretacji Paula Ricoeura i Hansa-Georga Gadamera. Analiza porównawcza Ideologia w edukacji. Spojrzenie opisowe, negatywne i pozytywne na przykładzie wybranych stanowisk pedagogiki katolickiej i krytycznej
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1