Del pensamiento crítico a la argumentación (crítica): Bordeando la irracionalidad

José Luis Da Silva Pinto

doi:10.62876/lr.vi038.6467

Authors

José Luis Da Silva Pinto Universitat de València / España

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.62876/lr.vi038.6467

Keywords:

Irrationality, Critical Thinking, arg, Rhetoric

Abstract

We are motivated by the idea that if we aspire to reduce the personal and social damages that may arise from the different forms of irrationality, we must reinforce critical thinking. Then, after some comments on some conceptions of critical thinking, we try to show the way of reinforcing critical thinking with the aim of skirting irrationality. This view differs from the traditional treatments of the critical movement by its broader dialectical and rhetorical approach to the nature of argumentation as an interactive, living and intersubjective process that is in a better position to resist the persistence of irrationality.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

José Luis Da Silva Pinto, Universitat de València / España

Universitat de València / España

References

Adelino Cattani y Jesús Alcolea Banegas: “Persuasión / Convicción”, Luis Vega Reñón y Paula Olmos Gómez (eds.), Compendio de lógica, argumentación y retórica, Madrid, Trotta, 2011, pp. 450-453.

Aristóteles, On Rhetoric. A Theory of Civic Discourse,

Aristóteles: On Rhetoric. A Theory of Civic Discourse. Trad. George Alexander Kennedy, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2ª edición, 2007 (1991).

Bertrand Russell: History of Western Philosophy, London, Routledge, 2005 (1945), p. 167.

Bertrand Russell: History of Western Philosophy, London, Routledge, 2005 (1945), p. 486.

Bruce McComiskey: Post-Truth Rhetoric and Composition, Logan, UT, Utah State University Press, 2017.

Chaïm Perelman: The Realm of Rhetoric, Trad. William Kluback, Notre Dame, IN, The University of Notre Dame Press, 1982 (1977), p. 149.

Christopher W. Tindale: “Rhetorical Argumentation and the Nature of Audience: Toward an Understanding of Audience-Issues in Argumentation”, pp. 508-532, Philosophy and Rhetoric, 46, n. 4, University Park, PA, The Pennsylvania State University, diciembre 2013.

Dan Ariely: Predictably Irrational: The Hidden Forces That Shape Our Decisions, New York, HarperCollins, 2008, p. 244.

Dan Sperber & Deirdre Wilson: Relevance. Communication and Cognition, Oxford, Blackwell, , 1995 (1986), pp. 38ss.

Douglas N. Walton: Informal Logic: A Pragmatic Approach, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, , 2008.

Frans H. van Eemeren y Rob Grootendorst: Una teoría sistemática de la argumentación. La perspectiva pragmadialéctica, , Biblos, 2011 (2004)

Frans H. Van Eemeren, Rob Grootendorst & Francisca Snoeck Henkemans: Fundamentals or Argumentation Theory: A Handbook of Historical Backgrounds and Contemporary Developments, Mahwah, NJ, Erlbaum, 1996.

Frans H. van Eemeren: Argumentation Theory: A Pragma-Dialectical Perspective. Cham (Suiza), Springer, 2018.

Frans H. Van Eemeren: Maniobras estratégicas en el discurso argumentativo. Trad. Cristian Santibáñez y María Elena Molina, Madrid & México, CSIC & Plaza y Valdés, 2012 (2010).

Gilbert Ryle: “Thinking and Reflecting”, pp. 479-493, Collected Papers, vol. II, Collected Essays, 1929-1968, London, Routledge, 2009 (1966-67).

Greg Nyilasy: “Fake News: When the Dark Side of Persuasion Takes Over”, pp. 336-342, International Journal of Advertising, 38, Taylor & Francis Group, mayo 2019.

Hans Reichenbach: Experience and Prediction. An Analysis of the Foundations and the Structure of Knowledge, Chicago, IL, University of Chicago Press, 1961 (1938)

Harry P. Reeder: “The Nature of Critical Thinking”, pp. 18-22, Informal Logic Newsletter, 6, Windsor, Ontario, University of Windsor, 1984.

Herbert Paul Grice: “Lógica y conversación”, pp. 511-530, Luis Miguel Valdés Villanueva (ed.), La búsqueda del significado: lecturas de filosofía del lenguaje, , Madrid & Murcia, Tecnos & Universidad de Murcia, 1991 (1975).

Hilary Putnam: Philosophy in the Age of Science: Physics, Mathematics, and Skepticism, edited by M. de Caro & D. Macarthur, Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press, 2012.

Jacques Hadamard: An Essay on the Psychology of Invention in the Mathematical Field, New York, Dover, 2003 (1959).

Jean-Paul Sartre: La náusea, Trad. Aurora Bernárdez, Madrid, Alianza Editorial, 2011 (1938), p. 205.

Jens E. Kjeldsen: “The Study of Visual and Multimodal Argumentation”, pp. 115-132, Argumentation. An International Journal on Reasoning, 29, nº 2, Springer Nature Switzerland, mayo 2015;

Jerome Bruner: Actual Minds, Possible Worlds, Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press, 1986, p. 12.

Jesús Alcolea Banegas, “Objeto y utilidad de la argumentación (retórica) y de la retórica (argumentativa)”, pp. 133-147, Hubert Marraud y Paula Olmos (eds.), De la demostración a la argumentación. Ensayos en honor de Luis Vega, Madrid, UAM Ediciones, 2015.

Jesús Alcolea Banegas: “A favor de la distinción entre ‘argumento’ y ‘argumentación’”, pp. 7-18, Antonio Campillo y Delia Manzanero (eds.), Los retos de la Filosofía en el siglo XXI. Actas del I Congreso internacional de la Red española de Filosofía. Vol. XI. Simposio 1. Argumentación, filosofía y discurso digital. Coordinado por Luis Vega. València: Red Española de Filosofía y Publicacions de la Universitat de València (PUV), 2015.

Jesús Alcolea Banegas: “Del uso de la lógica en la argumentación (crítica)”, pp. 418-422, José Díez, Manuel García-Carpintero, José Martínez y Sergi Oms (eds.), Actas del VIII Congreso de la Sociedad de Lógica, Metodología y Filosofía de la Ciencia en España, Barcelona 7-10 de julio 2015, Barcelona, Universitat de Barcelona, 2015.

Jesús Alcolea Banegas: “How to Be a Critical But Reasonable Debater”, p. 201, Mètode. Science Studies Journal, 8, València, Universitat de València, 2018.

John Dewey: How We Think. A Restatement of the Relation of Reflective Thinking to the Educative Process, Lexington, MA, D.C. Heath and Company, 1933.

John Hardwig: “Epistemic Dependence”, p. 336, The Journal of Philosophy, 82, n. 7, New York, Columbia University, julio 1985.

John Langshaw Austin: Cómo hacer cosas con palabras. Palabras y acciones, Trad. Genaro R. Carrió y Eduardo A. Rabossi, Barcelona, Paidós, 1990 (1962), p. 145.

John Woods, Andrew Irvine & Douglas N. Walton: Argument. Critical Thinking, Logic, and the Fallacies, Toronto, Pearson Education, 2004 (2000), p. 11.

Joseph W. Wenzel: “Jürgen Habermas and the Dialectical Perspective on Argumentation”, pp. 83-94, Journal of the American Forensic Association, 16, n. 2, River Falls, WI, University of Wisconsin, Otoño 1979.

Karl R. Popper La sociedad abierta y sus enemigos, con una adenda del autor, , Barcelona, Paidós, 2010 (1945), pp. 789 y 798).

Matthew Lipman: “Critical Thinking: What Can it Be?”, p. 5, Analytic Teaching, 8, nº 1, Fort Worth, Texas Wesleyan University, diciembre 1987.

Matthew Lipman: Thinking in Education, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2ª edic., 2003 (1991).

Michael Scriven & Richard W. Paul: Defining Critical Thinking. Draft statement written for the National Council for Excellence in Critical Thinking Instruction, 1987. (http://www.criticalthinking.org/pages/defining-critical-thinking/766) [consulta 20 de febrero de 2020]

Michael Scriven: “Probative Inference”, p. 1, Juho Ritola (ed.), Argument Cultures: Proceedings of OSSA 09, Windsor, ON, Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation, University of Windsor, 2009.

Michael Scriven: “Probative Logic: Review & Preview”, pp. 8-9, Frans H. van Eemeren, Rob Grootendorst, J. Anthony Blair y Charles Arthur Willard (eds.), Argumentation: Across the Lines of Discipline. Proceedings of the Conference on Argumentation 1986, Dordrecht, Foris, 1987.

Nicholas Rescher: Dialectics: A Controversy Oriented Approach to the Theory of Knowledge, Albany, NY, State University of New York Press, 1977, pp. 75ss.

Norris, Stephen P. & Ennis, Robert H., Evaluating Critical Thinking, pp. 12 y 14; y Ennis, Robert H., Critical Thinking, pp. 368-369.

Ralph H. Johnson & Benjamin Hamby: “A Meta-Level Approach to the Problem of Defining ‘Critical Thinking’”, pp. 427-428, Argumentation. An International Journal on Reasoning, 29, nº 4, Springer Nature Switzerland, octubre 2015.

Ralph H. Johnson: Manifest Rationality: A Pragmatic Theory of Argument, Mahwah, NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2000; y Douglas N. Walton: The New Dialectic: Conversational Contexts of Argument, Toronto, University of Toronto Press, 1998.

Reeder, Harry P., “The Nature of Critical Thinking”.

Robert M. Sapolsky:, Madrid, Capitán Compórtate. La biología que hay detrás de nuestros mejores y peores comportamientos, Swift Libros, 2018 (2017), p. 889.

Roderick P Hart; Suzanne M Daughton & Rebecca LaVally: Modern Rhetorical Criticism, New York, Routledge, 4ª edición, 2018, p. 25.

Sally Jackson: “Design Thinking in Argumentation Theory and Practice”, pp. 243-263, Argumentation. An International Journal on Reasoning, 29, nº 3, Springer Nature Switzerland, septiembre 2015.

Scott Jacobs: “Nonfallacious Rhetorical Strategies: Lyndon Johnson’s Daisy Ad”, pp. 421-442, Argumentation. An International Journal on Reasoning, 20, nº 4, Springer Nature Switzerland, diciembre 2006.

Sonja K. Foss & Karen A. Foss Inviting Transformation. Presentational Speaking for a Changing World, Prospect Hights, IL, Waveland Press, 4ª edición, 2019 (1993).

Stella Cottrell: Critical Thinking Skills. Developing Effective Analysis and Argument, London, Palgrave Macmillan, 2005

Stephen E. Toulmin, Richard Rieke & Allan Janik: An Introduction to Reasoning, New York, Macmillan, 2ª edición, 1984 (1979), p. 10.

Stephen E. Toulmin: Regreso a la razón. El debate entre la racionalidad y la experiencia y la práctica personal en el mundo contemporáneo, Barcelona: Península, 2003, p. 44.

Stephen P. Norris & Robert H. Ennis: Evaluating Critical Thinking, Pacific Grove, CA, Critical Thinking Press & Software, 1989, p. 3; y Robert H. Ennis: Critical Thinking, Upper Saddle River, NJ, Prentice Hall, 1996, p. 6.

Stuart Sutherland: Irrationality: The Enemy Within, London, Pinter & Martin Ltd, 2013.

Véase Timothy D. Wilson & Nancy Brekke: “Mental Contamination and Mental Correction: Unwanted Influences on Judgments and Evaluations”, pp. 117-142, Psychological Bulletin, 116, nº 1, Washington, American Psychological Association, julio 1994.

Viren Swami, Martin Voracek, Stefan Stieger, Ulrich S. Tran & Adrian Furnham: “Analytic Thinking Reduces Belief In Conspiracy Theories”, pp. 572-585, Cognition, 133, nº 3, Ámsterdam, Elsevier B.V.

y Jesús Alcolea Banegas: “Non-Verbal Arguments in War Requiem”, pp. 181-193, Dima Mohammed & Macin Lewiński (eds.), Argumentation and Reasoned Action: Proceedings of the 1st European Conference on Argumentation, Lisbon, 2015, London, College Publications, 2016.