Talk:Argumentation ethics: Difference between revisions

Latest revision as of 02:05, 27 October 2012

Debate

I'm too lazy to do this myself, thus this post; but, in the criticism section I think a bit more attention should be paid to the Murphy and Callahan--not just the reply--but the back and forth debate.

Kinsella documents the back-and-forth:

http://archive.mises.org/9610/revisiting-argumentation-ethics/

(note that the back-and-forth also includes a reply by a gentleman by the name Eabrasu and another by Frank van Dun that aren't mentioned in that section)

However, Kinsella's detailing of the debate misses Block's reply:

http://mises.org/journals/jls/22_1/22_1_31.pdf

It also misses (I believe) Murphy and Callahan's rewrite of the original article (which, I don't really feel like looking for at the moment).

Tl;dr, there's a whole debate to be documented here folks.

128.210.90.28 04:10, 27 October 2012 (MSD)

Revision as of 00:10, 27 October 2012 view source 128.210.90.28 (talk) Created page with "=Debate= I'm too lazy to do this myself, thus this post; but, in the criticism section I think a bit more attention should be paid to the Murphy and Callahan--not just the re..."		Latest revision as of 02:05, 27 October 2012 view source FormerContributor-78162cb3 (talk \| contribs) Bureaucrats, Administrators 2,692 edits m heading style
Line 1:		Line 1:
	=Debate=		==Debate==

	I'm too lazy to do this myself, thus this post; but, in the criticism section I think a bit more attention should be paid to the Murphy and Callahan--not just the reply--but the back and forth debate.		I'm too lazy to do this myself, thus this post; but, in the criticism section I think a bit more attention should be paid to the Murphy and Callahan--not just the reply--but the back and forth debate.