The Contrast between Dogmatic and Critical Arguments
The Contrast between Dogmatic and Critical Arguments
Author(s): Danny FrederickSubject(s): Epistemology, Philosophy of Science, Methodology and research technology
Published by: Filozofický ústav SAV
Keywords: Critical argument; critical thinking; David Miller; dogmatic argument; fallibilism; falsification; inference to the best explanation; justification; Karl Popper; persuasion; problem-solving;
Summary/Abstract: Karl Popper lamented the prevalence of dogmatic argument in philosophy and commended the kind of critical argument that is found in the sciences. David Miller criticises the uncritical nature of so-called critical thinking because of its attachment to dogmatic arguments. I expound and clarify Popper’s distinction between critical and dogmatic arguments and the background to it. I criticise some errors in Miller’s discussion. I reaffirm the need for philosophers to eschew dogmatic arguments in favour of critical ones.
Journal: Organon F
- Issue Year: 22/2015
- Issue No: 1
- Page Range: 9-20
- Page Count: 12
- Language: English
