Article published in:
Journal of Argumentation in Context
Vol. 8:2 (2019) ► pp. 173194
Aakhus, M., & Lewiński, M.
2017Advancing polylogical analysis of large-scale argumentation: Disagreement management in the fracking controversy. Argumentation 31 (1), 179–207. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Barnes, J.
1969Aristotle’s theory of demonstration. Phronesis 14 (2), 123–152. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Blackford, R., & Broderick, D.
2017Philosophy’s future: The problem of philosophical progress. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bourget, D., & Chalmers, D. J.
2014What do philosophers believe? Philosophical Studies 170 (3), 465–500. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Burge, T.
1986Individualism and psychology. Philosophical Review 94 (1), 3–45. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Chalmers, D. J.
2011Verbal disputes. Philosophical Review 120 (4), 515–566. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2015Why isn’t there more progress in philosophy? Philosophy 90 (1), 3–31. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Clark, A., & Chalmers, D. J.
1998The extended mind. Analysis 58 (1), 7–19. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Collingwood, R. G.
1939An autobiography. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Collins, R.
1998The sociology of philosophies: A global theory of intellectual change. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press.Google Scholar
Eemeren, F. H.
2010Strategic maneuvering in argumentative discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2018Argumentation theory: A pragma-dialectical perspective. Cham, CH: Springer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ferejohn, M.
1991The origins of Aristotelian science. New Haven: Yale University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gaos, J.
1960De la filosofía [On philosophy]. Mexico City: Fondo de Cultura Económica.Google Scholar
Grosjean, M.
2004From multi-participant talk to genuine polylogue: Shift-change briefing sessions at the hospital. In Kerbrat-Orecchioni (Ed.) 2004, 25–52. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Harman, G.
2011Quentin Meillassoux: Philosophy in the making. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Hill, G. N., & Hill, K. T.
1995Real life dictionary of the law. Los Angeles: General Publishing Group.Google Scholar
Hintikka, J.
1972On the ingredients of an Aristotelian science. Noûs 6 (1), 55–69. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Jaspers, K.
1919Psychologie der Weltanschauungen. Berlin: Springer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Johnstone, H. W., Jr.
1959Philosophy and argument. University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar
1978Validity and rhetoric in philosophical argument. University Park, PA: The Dialogue Press of Man & World.Google Scholar
Kant, I.
1781Critik der reinen Vernunft. Riga: Hartknoch.Google Scholar
Kerbrat-Orecchioni, C.
(Ed.) 2004Polylogue. Special issue of the Journal of Pragmatics 36 (1), 1–145. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kusch, M.
1995Psychologism: A case study in the sociology of philosophical knowledge. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Ladyman, J., & Ross, D.
(2007) Every thing must go: Metaphysics naturalized. New York: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lewiński, M.
2014aArgumentative polylogues in a dialectical framework: A methodological inquiry. Argumentation 28 (2), 161–185. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2014bPractical reasoning in argumentative polylogues. Revista Iberoamericana de Argumentación 81, 1–20.Google Scholar
Marcoccia, M.
2004On-line polylogues: Conversation structure and participation framework in internet newsgroups. In Kerbrat-Orecchioni (Ed.) 2004, 115–145. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Menary, R.
2010Introduction: The extended mind in focus. In R. Menary (Ed.), The extended mind (pp. 1–25). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Overgaard, S., Gilbert, P., & Burwood, S.
2013An introduction to metaphilosophy. New York: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Passmore, J.
1961Philosophical reasoning. New York: Scribner.Google Scholar
Pigliucci, M.
2017The nature of philosophy: How philosophy makes progress and why it matters. New York: Author (Amazon Kindle).Google Scholar
Putnam, H.
1975Philosophical papers, vol. 2: Mind, language, and reality. New York: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Redding, P.
2007Analytic philosophy and the return of Hegelian thought. New York: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Rescher, N.
1978Philosophical disagreement: An essay towards orientational pluralism in metaphilosophy. The Review of Metaphysics 32 (2), 217–251.Google Scholar
1985The strife of systems: An essay on the grounds and implications of philosophical diversity. Pittsburgh: The University of Pittsburgh Press.Google Scholar
2001Philosophical reasoning: A study in the methodology of philosophizing. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Stoljar, D.
2017Philosophical progress: In defence of a reasonable optimism. New York: Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Strawson, G.
2004aA fallacy of our age. The Times Literary Supplement, October 15.Google Scholar
2004bAgainst narrativity. Ratio (new series) XVII1, 428–452. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2018Things that bother me: Death, freedom, the self, etc. New York: New York Review Books.Google Scholar
Weber, Z.
(Ed.) 2011Philosophy’s future. Special Issue of Essays in Philosophy 121 (https://​commons​.pacificu​.edu​/eip/).
Williamson, T.
2018Doing philosophy: From common curiosity to logical reasoning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 6 other publications

Leal, Fernando & Hubert Marraud
2022.  In How Philosophers Argue [Argumentation Library, 41],  pp. 51 ff. Crossref logo
Leal, Fernando & Hubert Marraud
2022.  In How Philosophers Argue [Argumentation Library, 41],  pp. 219 ff. Crossref logo
Leal, Fernando & Hubert Marraud
2022.  In How Philosophers Argue [Argumentation Library, 41],  pp. 437 ff. Crossref logo
Leal Carretero, Fernando Miguel
2020. ¿Qué es una postura en filosofía? Un enfoque pragma-dialéctico. Revista Iberoamericana de Argumentación :21  pp. 86 ff. Crossref logo
Sarıhan, Işık
2022. Problems with Publishing Philosophical Claims We Don't Believe. Episteme  pp. 1 ff. Crossref logo
van Eemeren, Frans H. & Bart Garssen
2019.  In Argumentation in Actual Practice [Argumentation in Context, 17],  pp. 1 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 19 april 2022. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.