Abstract
We propose a reading of Kreisel’s informal rigour as a dialectic interplay between a formal and an intuitive level in the study of logically relevant notions. To substantiate our reading, we provide two case-studies: Prawitz semantics and Walton’s analysis of argument schemes. Prawitz’s semantics suggests an interaction between informal presuppositions, confirmed and refined by results about formal setups, and formal setups, which can be improved by suitably formalising informal presuppositions. In Walton’s Argumentation Theory, argument schemes are introduced to account for arguments that support their conclusion in a presumptive way. The possibility of developing such informal notion through the formal means provided by research in AI shows the importance of the interaction between these two levels in the analysis of defeasibility.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
