Argumentation Dec 2019 Open Access

Presumptions, and How They Relate to Arguments from Ignorance

Petar Bodlović University of Groningen

Abstract

AbstractBy explaining the argument from ignorance in terms of thepresumption of innocence, many textbooks in argumentation theory suggest that some arguments from ignorance might share essential features with some types of presumptive reasoning. The stronger version of this view, suggesting that arguments from ignorance and presumptive reasoning are almost indistinguishable, is occasionally proposed by Douglas Walton. This paper explores the nature and limits of the stronger proposal and argues that initial presumptions and arguments from ignorance arenotclosely connected. There are three main reasons. First, the argument from ignorance, unlike typical presumptive reasoning, is a negative kind of inference. Second, the typical initial presumption is sensitive to a broader set of defeaters and thus assumes a higher (negative) standard of acceptability. Third, in dialectical terms, initial presumption and argument from ignorance bring different attacking rights and obligations. I conclude that Waltonian intuition is unsupported or, at best, is limited only to practical presumptions and practical arguments from ignorance.

Journal
Argumentation
Published
2019-12-01
DOI
10.1007/s10503-019-09498-8
CompPile
Open Access
OA PDF Hybrid
Topics
Export
BibTeX RIS

Citation context

Cited by in this index (1)

  1. Bodlović (2021)
    On the Differences Between Practical and Cognitive Presumptions
    Argumentation

References (51) · 10 in this index

  1. Aijaz et al. (2013)
    Burdens of Proof and the Case for Unevenness
    Argumentation
  2. L Bermejo-Luque (2016)
    Bermejo-Luque, L. 2016. Being a Correct Presumption Vs. Being Presumably the Case. Informal Logic 36 (1): 1–25.
    Informal Logic  ↗
  3. Bodlović (2017)
    Dialogical Features of Presumptions: Difficulties for Walton’s New Dialogical Theory
    Argumentation
  4. IM Copi (2016)
    Introduction to Logic
     ↗
  5. L Cummings (2002)
    Cummings, L. 2002. Reasoning Under Uncertainty: The Role of Two Informal Fallacies in an Emerging Scientific …
    Informal Logic  ↗
Show all 51 →
  1. R Feldman (2003)
    Epistemology
  2. JB Freeman (2005)
    Acceptable Premises
  3. Gama (2017)
    The Nature and the Place of Presumptions in Law and Legal Argumentation
    Argumentation
  4. Godden (2017)
    Presumption as a Modal Qualifier: Presumption, Inference, and Managing Epistemic Risk
    Argumentation
  5. D Godden (2007)
    Godden, D., and D. Walton. 2007. A Theory of Presumption for Everyday Argumentation. Pragmatics & Cognition 1…
    Pragmatics & Cognition  ↗
  6. Hahn et al. (2007)
    The Burden of Proof and Its Role in Argumentation
    Argumentation
  7. C Hamblin (1970)
    Fallacies
  8. HV Hansen (2003)
    Proceedings of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation (OSSA)
  9. Hasan, A., and R. Fumerton. 2016. Foundationalist Theories of Epistemic Justification. In The Stanford Encycl…
  10. P Houtlosser (2003)
    Proceedings of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation (OSSA)
  11. Kauffeld (1998)
    Presumptions and the Distribution of Argumentative Burdens in Acts of Proposing…
    Argumentation
  12. F Kauffeld (2003)
    Anyone Who has a View: Theoretical Contributions to the Study of Argumentation
     ↗
  13. Kauffeld, F.J. 2005. Presumptions and Shifting the Burden of Proof. Paper Presented at the IPrA Conference. h…
  14. ECW Krabbe (1995)
    Fallacies: Classical and Contemporary Readings
  15. Lewiński (2017)
    Argumentation Theory Without Presumptions
    Argumentation
  16. J Locke (1995)
    Fallacies: Classical and Contemporary Readings
  17. F Macagno (2011)
    Macagno, F., and D. Walton. 2011. Reasoning from Paradigms and Negative Evidence. Pragmatics & Cognition 19 (…
    Pragmatics & Cognition  ↗
  18. F Macagno (2012)
    Macagno, F., and D. Walton. 2012. Presumptions in Legal Argumentation. Ratio Juris 25 (3): 271–300.
    Ratio Juris  ↗
  19. C Perelman (1969)
    The New Rhetoric. A Treatise on Argumentation
  20. Pinto, R.C. 2001. Argument, Inference and Dialectic: Collected Papers on Informal Logic (with an introduction…
     ↗
  21. Plumer (2017)
    Presumptions, Assumptions, and Presuppositions of Ordinary Arguments
    Argumentation
  22. JL Pollock (1987)
    Pollock, J.L. 1987. Defeasible Reasoning. Cognitive Science 11: 481–518.
    Cognitive Science  ↗
  23. H Prakken (2006)
    Legal Knowledge and Information Systems: JURIX 2006: The Nineteenth Annual Conference
  24. N Rescher (1977)
    Dialectics: A Controversy-Oriented Approach to the Theory of Knowledge
  25. N Rescher (2006)
    Presumption and the Practices of Tentative Cognition
     ↗
  26. M Rescorla (2009)
    Rescorla, M. 2009. Shifting the Burden of Proof? Philosophical Quarterly 59 (234): 86–109.
    Philosophical Quarterly  ↗
  27. Rhode (2017)
    The Burden of Proof in Philosophical Persuasion Dialogue
    Argumentation
  28. TD Senor (1996)
    Senor, T.D. 1996. The Prima/Ultima Facie Justification Distinction in Epistemology. Philosophy and Phenomenol…
    Philosophy and Phenomenological Research  ↗
  29. CW Tindale (2007)
    Fallacies and Argument Appraisal
     ↗
  30. G Tuzet (2015)
    Argument Types and Fallacies in Legal Argumentation
     ↗
  31. E Ullmann-Margalit (1983)
    Ullmann-Margalit, E. 1983. On Presumption. Journal of Philosophy 80 (3): 143–163.
    Journal of Philosophy  ↗
  32. FH van Eemeren (2002)
    Advances in Pragma-Dialectics
  33. FH van Eeemeren (2004)
    A Systematic Theory of Argumentation. The Pragma-Dialectical Approach
  34. FH van Eeemeren (2009)
    Fallacies and Judgments of Reasonableness
     ↗
  35. Laar et al. (2013)
    The Burden of Criticism: Consequences of Taking a Critical Stance
    Argumentation
  36. D Walton (1992)
    Walton, D. 1992. Nonfallacious Arguments from Ignorance. American Philosophical Quarterly 29 (4): 381–387.
    American Philosophical Quarterly
  37. D Walton (1993)
    Walton, D. 1993. The Speech Act of Presumption. Pragmatics & Cognition 1 (1): 125–148.
    Pragmatics & Cognition  ↗
  38. D Walton (1996)
    Argumentation Schemes for Presumptive Reasoning
  39. D Walton (1999)
    The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy
  40. D Walton (2001)
    Walton, D. 2001. Abductive, Presumptive and Plausible Arguments. Informal Logic 21 (2): 141–169.
    Informal Logic  ↗
  41. D Walton (2008)
    Walton, D. 2008a. Presumption, Burden of Proof and Lack of Evidence. L’Analisi Linguistica e Latteraria 16 (1…
    L’Analisi Linguistica e Latteraria
  42. D Walton (2008)
    Walton, D. 2008b. A Dialogical Theory of Presumption. Artificial Intelligence and Law 16 (2): 209–243.
    Artificial Intelligence and Law  ↗
  43. D Walton (2014)
    Burden of Proof, Presumption and Argumentation
     ↗
  44. D Walton (2008)
    Argumentation Schemes
     ↗
  45. J Woods (1978)
    Woods, J., and D. Walton. 1978. The Fallacy of ‘Ad Ignorantiam’. Dialectica 32 (2): 87–99.
    Dialectica  ↗
  46. M Wreen (1989)
    Wreen, M. 1989. Light from Darkness, from Ignorance Knowledge. Dialectica 43 (4): 299–314.
    Dialectica  ↗
CrossRef global citation count: 5 View in citation network → Build reading path →

Related articles

  1. Rhetoric Society Quarterly May 2025
    “What’s Crazy Is Look How Better I Got”: Rethinking Ethos in the Crisis of Perpetual Stasis ↗
    Amy Koerber; Tameem Al-Shawaf
    argument
  2. Philosophy & Rhetoric Apr 2025
    The Problem of Democratic Persuasion ↗
    Linda M. G. Zerilli
    argument
  3. Philosophy & Rhetoric Dec 2024
    Can Rational Persuasion Be Epistemically Paternalistic? ↗
    Patrick Bondy
    argument
  4. Philosophy & Rhetoric Dec 2024
    Argument’s Autonomy Problem ↗
    John Casey
    argument
  5. Philosophy & Rhetoric Dec 2024
    Autonomy and Argumentation: An Introduction ↗
    John Casey; Katharina Stevens
    argument