Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T19:38:00.529Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Pragmatic Arguments*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 February 2009

Perelman
Perelman
Affiliation:
University of Brussels
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Sometimes we draw conclusions about a thing's existence or its value by considering what are thought to be its consequences. I shall say that an argument is pragmatic when it consists in estimating an action, or any event, or a rule, or whatever it may be, in terms of its favourable or unfavourable consequences; what happens in such cases is that all or part of the value of the consequences is transferred to whatever is regarded as causing or preventing them.

Type
Articles
Information
Philosophy , Volume 34 , Issue 128 , January 1959 , pp. 18 - 27
Copyright
Copyright © The Royal Institute of Philosophy1959

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

references

1Section II, part 2.Google Scholar
2Locke, , The second Treatise of civil government and A letter concerning toleration, Oxford, Blackwell,1948, p. 135.Google Scholar
3Bentham, Oeuvres, Bruxelles, 1829, t. I. Principes de législation, Ch. XIII, p. 40.Google Scholar
4Pascal, Pensées, 205 (139 éd. Brunschvicg), in Oeuvres, éd. de la Pléiade, Paris, 1941.Google Scholar
5Cf. The remarks ofDanzig, D. Van in Democracy in a World of Tensions, ed. by McKeon, R., University of Chicago Press, 1951, pp. 54–5.Google Scholar
6Ch. Odier, L’angoisse et la pensée magique, Neuchâtel 1948, p. 122.Google Scholar
7Perelman, and Olbrechts-Tyteca, L., Traité de l’Argumentation, Paris, Presses Univ. de France (1958) § 76.Google Scholar
8Mill, J. S., Utilitarianism, ed. by Plamenatz, J., Oxford, Blackwell, 1949, pp. 169–71.Google Scholar
9J. S. Mill, op. cit.Google Scholar
10James, W., “What Pragmatism Means”, in Essays in Pragmatism, Hafner Publishing Company, New York, 1948, p. 155.Google Scholar
11Calvin, Institution de la religion chrétienne, Genève, 1888, LII, ch. II, § 1.Google Scholar
12Leibniz, Oeuvres, éd. Gerhardt, 5ème vol. Nouveaus essais sur l’entendement, p. 60.Google Scholar
13Cf. G. Marcel, Un homme de Dieu.Google Scholar
14Aristote, Rhétorique, L. II, 1399a.Google Scholar
15Cf. Bentham, op. cit. V. I., p. 10.Google Scholar
16Bentham, op. cit. VI, ch. VIII, p. 24.Google Scholar
17Quintilian, , Institutions oratoriae, Paris, Gamier, 1933, vol. II, LVI, ch. III. § 77.Google Scholar
18Guigues le Chartreux, Meditaciones, Patrologia latina, t. CLIII, col, 610B.Google Scholar
19Quintilian, , Institutions oratoriae, vol. II, LV, ch. X, § 84.Google Scholar
20E. Gilson, Le thomisme, Paris, Vrin 1945, p. 223.Google Scholar
21Montaigne, Essais, Bibl. de la Pléiade, Paris 1946, LIII, ch. VIII, pp. 904–5.Google Scholar
22Weil, S., L’enracinement, Paris, Gallimard, 1949, p. 213.Google Scholar
23E. Goblot, La logique des jugements de valeur, Paris 1927, pp. 55–6.Google Scholar
24Scheler, Der Formalismus in der Ethik, p. 180.Google Scholar