Abstract
We examine a contribution L. Susan Stebbing made to the understanding of
critical thinking and its relation to formal logic. Stebbing took
expertise in formal logic to authorise logical intervention in public
debate, specifically in assessing of the validity of everyday reasoning.
She held, however, that formal logic is purely the study of logical
form. Given the problems of ascertaining logical form in any particular
instance, and that logical form does not always track informal validity,
it is difficult to see how she could justify her belief in logical
interventionism. Her answer to this problem is the contribution we
explore here. It involves the view that although the logician’s
expertise is not sufficient to assess arguments made in everyday
contexts on its own, it nevertheless plays a unique role in giving
systematicity and direction to the critique of such arguments, in
particular, in public debate.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Number of pages | 17 |
Journal | History and Philosophy of Logic |
Volume | Latest Articles |
Early online date | 1 Mar 2021 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | E-pub ahead of print - 1 Mar 2021 |