Reason (argument) in the context of "Logical argument"

⭐ In the context of logical_argument, Reason_(argument) is considered a fundamental component of which core function?

Ad spacer

⭐ Core Definition: Reason (argument)

In philosophy and argumentation, a reason is a consideration that counts in favor of a conclusion, action, attitude or fact, or that explains why something is so. Reasons typically answer a why? question and are often introduced by expressions such as because, since, as, in virtue of, or in order to. They are central to accounts of practical reason, epistemic justification, moral evaluation, and everyday explanation, and they figure prominently in law and deliberative discourse.

Philosophers commonly distinguish three roles for reasons. Normative (or justifying) reasons are considerations that count in favor of responding one way rather than another (e.g., that it is raining is a reason to take an umbrella). Motivating reasons are the considerations in light of which an agent acts—what the agent treats as counting in favor at the time, whether or not it in fact does. Explanatory reasons cite what explains an event or action; when agents are involved, these often refer to psychological states (for example, that someone believed they were late explains why they ran).

↓ Menu

>>>PUT SHARE BUTTONS HERE<<<
In this Dossier

Reason (argument) in the context of Argument

An argument is one or more premisessentences, statements, or propositions—directed towards arriving at a logical conclusion. The purpose of an argument is to give reasons for one's thinking and understanding via justification, explanation, or persuasion. As a series of logical steps, arguments are intended to determine or show the degree of truth or acceptability of a logical conclusion.

The process of crafting or delivering arguments, argumentation, can be studied from three main perspectives: through the logical, the dialectical and the rhetorical perspective.

↑ Return to Menu

Reason (argument) in the context of Norm (philosophy)

Norms, in philosophy, are concepts (sentences) of practical import, oriented to affecting an action, rather than conceptual abstractions that describe, explain, and express. Normative sentences imply "ought-to" (or "may", "may not") types of statements and assertions, in distinction to sentences that provide "is" (or "was", "will") types of statements and assertions. Common normative sentences include commands, permissions, and prohibitions; common normative abstract concepts include sincerity, justification, and honesty. A popular account of norms describes them as reasons to take action, to believe, and to feel.

↑ Return to Menu

Reason (argument) in the context of Argument map

An argument map or argument diagram is a visual representation of the structure of an argument. An argument map typically includes all the key components of the argument, traditionally called the conclusion and the premises, also called contention and reasons. Argument maps can also show co-premises, objections, counterarguments, rebuttals, inferences, and lemmas. There are different styles of argument map but they are often functionally equivalent and represent an argument's individual claims and the relationships between them.

Argument maps are commonly used in the context of teaching and applying critical thinking. The purpose of mapping is to uncover the logical structure of arguments, identify unstated assumptions, evaluate the support an argument offers for a conclusion, and aid understanding of debates. Argument maps are often designed to support deliberation of issues, ideas and arguments in wicked problems.

↑ Return to Menu

Reason (argument) in the context of Principle of sufficient reason

The principle of sufficient reason or PSR states that everything must have a sufficient reason. It is similar to the idea that everything must have a cause, a deterministic system of universal causation. A sufficient reason is sometimes described as the coincidence of every single thing that is needed for the occurrence of an effect. The principle is relevant to Munchausen's trilemma, as it seems to suppose an infinite regress, rather than a foundational brute fact. The principle was articulated and made prominent by Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz. Arthur Schopenhauer wrote On the Fourfold Root of the Principle of Sufficient Reason.

↑ Return to Menu

Reason (argument) in the context of Philosophical argument

An argument is one or more premisessentences, statements, or propositions—directed towards arriving at a logical conclusion. The purpose of an argument is to give reasons for one's thinking and understanding via justification, explanation, or persuasion. As a series of logical steps, arguments are intended to determine or show the degree of truth or acceptability of a logical conclusion.

The process of crafting or delivering arguments, argumentation, can be studied from three main perspectives: through the logical, the dialectical, and the rhetorical perspective.

↑ Return to Menu