RevLog

Responsables scientifiques : Leone Gazziero (CNRS, UMR 8163 Savoirs, Textes, Langage) et Shahid Rahman (ULille UMR 8163 Savoirs, Textes, Langage)

Membres du projet : Aurélien Djian (CDD), Roberta Padlina(CDD)

Début du projet : 01/09/2019
Fin du projet : 31/08/2021
Durée du projet : 24 mois

Financeur : I-SITE ULNE (116 457 €) http://www.isite-ulne.fr/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/LAUREATS-ERC-GENERATOR-2019-1.pdf

Résumé du projet :

Bad arguments have never been in short supply. The scholarly interest they have elicited in recent years, on the other hand, is quite exceptional. Fallacy studies have become a well established and flourishing field of argumentation theory (“critical thinking” being one of the umbrella labels under which the subject is often advertised). With so few exceptions as to make no difference, the ever growing number of essays, book-chapters, book-length studies, reviews special issues and even handbooks on the subject – which are easily counted by the hundreds – suffer from a symptomatic lack of interest in Mediaeval theory and practice of argumentation Logic which is – arguably – the most creative stage in the whole history of fallacy theories. The standard story is that after Aristotle got it off to a great start, the discipline became dormant until Richard Whately first and John Stuart Mill soon afterwards revived it in spectacular fashion (a few hypermnestic « historians » go as far back as Francis Bacon and John Locke).