Question-Begging Arguments as Ones that do not Extend Knowledge

Authors

  • Rainer Ebert Visiting Research Fellow, Centre de Recherche en Éthique, Montréal, Canada

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3329/pp.v65i1-2.55957

Abstract

In this article, I propose a formal criterion that distinguishes between deductively valid arguments that do and do not beg the question. I define the concept of a Never-failing Minimally Competent Knower (NMCK) and suggest that an argument begs the question just in case it cannot possibly assist an NMCK in extending his or her knowledge.

Philosophy and Progress, Vol#65-66-; No#1-2; Jan-Dec 2019 P 125-144

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.
Abstract
23
PDF
9

Downloads

Published

2021-10-24

How to Cite

Ebert, R. . (2021). Question-Begging Arguments as Ones that do not Extend Knowledge. Philosophy and Progress, 65(1-2), 125–144. https://doi.org/10.3329/pp.v65i1-2.55957

Issue

Section

Articles