Re Kevin's two points



I think he is right about the limited utility of translating AILACT, but
since there is considerable activity re CT in non-English speaking
countries, it seems appropriate to find some way of linking to those
activities. I suggest that we provide links to newsletters, organizations,
etc that are working in non-English speaking countries so that AILACT  users
could discover and if able, access these resources.  I know for example
that there is a CT group in China that produces a newsletter in Mandarin
and two of its editors (former students of David Hitchcock) live in Toronto.



Re Argumentation.  Kevin assumes that the term has been captured by the
Amsterdam school.  But that is only one approach to looking at
argumentative discourse. As someone who argued for viewing CT as "applied
epistemology" I am sympathetic to his (and many others) criticism of the
Amsterdam approach. But that does not mean that there is not a place for
the study and instruction of rational deliberation and persuasion.  For
example, in our textbook (*Reason in the Balance*) Sharon and I have a
chapter on how to keep discussions on a rational basis in the face of
fallacious arguments.  In this case, the identification of fallacies is
used as a tool not simply for *Logical  Self Defense*, but for providing
strategies for preventing discourse from going off the rational rails.  In
addition an effective CT course is probably the best preparation for
writing academic essays--which are surely exercises in rational
persuasion.  And writing such essays require consideration of relevant
rhetorical factors (such as audience, essay structure, etc)  to produce a
quality (and persuasive ) essay.  We should welcome the addition to CT of
the focus on argumentative discourse advocated by Amsterdam School without
accepting their approach to its treatment.


Dr. Mark Battersby
Critical Inquiry Group
Professor Emeritus Department of Philosophy
Capilano University

On Sat, May 19, 2018 at 6:37 PM, Possin, Kevin E <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Hello all,
>
> The discussion has diverged into two strands.  I'd like to comment on both:
>
> Regarding translating the AILACT site into other languages:  The site does
> not yet have enough content to be worthy of translation.  Of the 16
> "proposed measures" listed at the end of the AILACT Innovation Memo,
> approved by the Board [was that 3 years ago?], translating the website into
> an array of languages is not among them.  Perhaps if a significant number
> of those projects were accomplished and their results posted on our
> website, we would have a site worth sharing with the world in more ways
> than just in English; but not now.  I think our efforts would be better
> spent revisiting that Innovation Memo and working on its projects, as
> challenging as they are.
>
> Regarding the debate that Bob has generated, between CT and argumentation
> theory [AT]:  I am rather sympathetic to Bob's point of view.  The goal of
> CT is true belief, correct values, and rational action plans.  The goal of
> AT is persuasion.  The degree to which one thinks it is important to use
> argumentation and "dialectical" exchanges in the pursuit of the truth, is
> the degree to which one is interested in CT and justification and not
> solely interested in AT or sophistry.  Both AT and CT are interested in
> informal fallacies and cognitive biases, but for different reasons:  AT
> studies them descriptively, as argumentative phenomena and as useful means
> of persuasion--informal fallacies are notoriously effective at getting
> people to adopt beliefs, values, and action plans for which they have no
> good epistemic reasons.  CT studies those fallacies and biases normatively,
> as rhetorical tricks and cognitive habits to be avoided, both rationally
> and ethically.
>
> CT holds that one is ethically obliged to follow one's best evidence to
> its sometimes bitter conclusions and to share those results with others
> rather than leaving them in error or ignorance.  So, in this respect, CT is
> interested in persuasion; but not persuasion for personal gain, but rather
> persuasion for the epistemic gain of everyone.
>
> I am also inclined to agree with Bob's point of view regarding
> justification and knowledge:  There is no difference between knowledge and
> justification with respect to an individual's belief or a social group's
> belief.  To think that the group is more than the sum of its members is a
> category mistake a la Ryle's example of someone who still wants a tour of
> the university campus after seeing all the buildings, students, etc.  The
> so-called "dialectal" exchanges that occur among individuals in a group,
> debating the pros and cons of a position, is no different than an
> individual mulling over the same evidence and counter-evidence with respect
> to that position on their own.  Both are held to the same justificatory
> standards advocated by CT.
>
> Thanks for your consideration,
>
> Kevin
>
>
> On May 10, 2018, at 5:11 PM, Lilian Bermejo Luque wrote:
>
> Dear all,
>
> The board of directors of AILACT is going to launch a series of questions
> in order to encourage members to colectively debate and decide about
> possible ways of invigorating our association. The first question we would
> like to ask is this:
>
> Expanding the presence of the Argumentation, Critical Thinking and
> Informal Logic community in non-English speaking countries seems like a
> sound goal for our association. Do you think it would be a good idea to
> have our website translated into other languages, like Spanish, Chinese,
> Portuguese, etc.? In case you do, how do you think we should do it? Do you
> have other ideas to achieve this goal?
>
> Kind regards,
> Lilian
>
>
> --
> Dra. Lilian Bermejo Luque
> Profesora Titular
> Departamento de Filosofía I
> Universidad de Granada
> Tlf. +34 958249725
> http://www.ugr.es/~lilianbl/index.htm
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.ugr.es_-257Elilianbl_index.htm&d=DwMFaQ&c=mRWFL96tuqj9V0Jjj4h40ddo0XsmttALwKjAEOCyUjY&r=KTO-67piPlkvVwpkegE90CPhOOUVOHyNkd2ycJxraVlOjFMzr4s8w_Q89bvfLZgJ&m=RcykJiY8PCuiR9ILmd86mHFEikhAeP_83CDAM94iY8Y&s=U2v3RKEJs9O-58raIoWTBBEB727CtIutrRiGVW-ws7o&e=>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> To unsubscribe from the AILACTD-L list, click the following link:
> https://HUNTER.LISTSERV.CUNY.EDU/scripts/wa-hc.exe?TICKET=
> NzM2ODU0IEtQb3NzaW5AUkVUSVJFRS5XSU5PTkEuRURVIEFJTEFDVEQtTB8R
> is3MozLr&c=SIGNOFF
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__HUNTER.LISTSERV.CUNY.EDU_scripts_wa-2Dhc.exe-3FTICKET-3DNzM2ODU0IEtQb3NzaW5AUkVUSVJFRS5XSU5PTkEuRURVIEFJTEFDVEQtTB8Ris3MozLr-26c-3DSIGNOFF&d=DwMFAw&c=mRWFL96tuqj9V0Jjj4h40ddo0XsmttALwKjAEOCyUjY&r=KTO-67piPlkvVwpkegE90CPhOOUVOHyNkd2ycJxraVlOjFMzr4s8w_Q89bvfLZgJ&m=_OF5FgVW4h-oBKUzvTZ93iZ8QZl3j7kx035USY-dodc&s=V10zFHOAX68STicDKYCBPwazWZsA4ktvMfXxYFrf1Z8&e=>
>
>
> ********************************
> Kevin Possin
> Professor Emeritus
> Department of Philosophy
> Winona State University
> The Critical Thinking Lab
> 1012 Calle Dorthia
> <https://maps.google.com/?q=1012+Calle+Dorthia+%0D%0A+Santa+Fe,+NM++87506+%0D%0A+%0D%0A+%0D%0A+USA&entry=gmail&source=g>
> Santa Fe, NM
> <https://maps.google.com/?q=1012+Calle+Dorthia+%0D%0A+Santa+Fe,+NM++87506+%0D%0A+%0D%0A+%0D%0A+USA&entry=gmail&source=g>
>  87506
> <https://maps.google.com/?q=1012+Calle+Dorthia+%0D%0A+Santa+Fe,+NM++87506+%0D%0A+%0D%0A+%0D%0A+USA&entry=gmail&source=g>
>
> USA
> <https://maps.google.com/?q=1012+Calle+Dorthia+%0D%0A+Santa+Fe,+NM++87506+%0D%0A+%0D%0A+%0D%0A+USA&entry=gmail&source=g>
> 507.459.6689
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> To unsubscribe from the AILACTD-L list, click the following link:
> https://HUNTER.LISTSERV.CUNY.EDU/scripts/wa-hc.exe?TICKET=
> NzM2ODYzIHByb2Zlc3NvcmJhdHRlcnNieUBHTUFJTC5DT00gQUlMQUNURC1M
> ILNOu6NvYC%2Fo&c=SIGNOFF
>

########################################################################

To unsubscribe from the AILACTD-L list, click the following link:
https://hunter.listserv.cuny.edu/Scripts/wa-hc.exe?SUBED1=AILACTD-L