Timeline for For arguments, besides validity and soundness, what of Potential Convincingness?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
5 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 19, 2015 at 1:22 | comment | added | user9166 | The case where the argument is actually valid is a subcase, but it is still an instance of plausibility. It is all one thing, making something seem likely to be true is the same whether you are seeking something or communicating something you have already found. | |
| Jun 18, 2015 at 20:24 | comment | added | Conifold | The book is Mathematics and Plausible Reasoning, volume 2 is Patterns of Plausible Inference. But Polya is talking about heuristics, and his plausibility is not "convincingness", the point is not to convince, but to discover. If anything, heuristic arguments are designed to be less convincing than logical ones, their purpose is to generate conjectures, which can later be verified by other means. One loosens the screws to let more in. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mathematics_and_plausible_reasoning | |
| Jun 18, 2015 at 19:24 | comment | added | user9166 | No one uses the word that way, i.e. in reference to the audience. A potential argument is equally possible to give anyone. But an argument is plausible to an audience, one who can find a common base of premises, and who can follow it. | |
| Jun 18, 2015 at 18:51 | comment | added | Ronnie Smith | Its not plausibility but potential, no? In other words, it amounts to the difference between what the person believes (the premises) but doesn't believe (the conclusion). The greater that amount the more disruptive the argument. Potential. | |
| Jun 18, 2015 at 18:30 | history | answered | user9166 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |