In this paper, I defend that logic has a normative status for reasoning. To support my argument, I question whether logic can be limited to a formal calculus that establishes relations among truth-bearers (Goldstein, 1988). Instead, I argue that logic encompasses the study of inference in ordinary language. Similarly, I challenge traditional views of reasoning that depict it as a private process of drawing inferences. Instead, I embrace perspectives that view reasoning as a social activity (Dutilh-Novaes, 2021; Godden, 2015; Kalis, 2022; Mackenzie, 1989). From these bases, I explore the concept of the natural normativity of argumentation (Gilbert, 2007; Jackson, 2019). Since argumentative practices inherently possess a normative dimension, logic aims to capture and represent the rules that govern these linguistic exchanges. Logical rules are the tools from which agents can exert normative control over argumentative practices.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Alba Massolo (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: