The present section considers several such arguments.
The court stopped hearing arguments in its courtroom in early March in light of health concerns, postponing arguments in about 20 cases.
These arguments are crucial for the case for sentimentalism.
Independent-arguments, we might say, are belief-dependent and not truth-dependent.
For those arguments are also arguments, inter alia, against the compatibilist's favored account of ability.
In sum, arguments much like arguments against beef production seem to apply as forcefully to dairy production.
In sum, arguments much like arguments against chicken production seem to apply as forcefully to egg production.
Note, also, that these arguments are most naturally taken as arguments for Possibility Haecceitism rather than, say, World Haecceitism.
Arguments against miracle claims, like arguments in their favor, come in a variety of forms, invoke diverse premises, and have distinct aims.
We have considered three families of argument: calibration arguments, accuracy arguments, and epistemic disutility arguments.
The arguments, understood as such, are not arguments for the minimal sense-datum theory—the arguments presuppose such a theory.
Before we turn to assessment of ontological arguments, we need to get clear about what the proper intended goals of ontological arguments can be.
Theistic pragmatic arguments are not arguments for the proposition that God exists; they are arguments that believing that God exists is rational.
This section is devoted to an overview of certain fictionalism-relevant arguments, together with remarks on what forms of fictionalism these arguments purport to justify.
In other words, ontological arguments are arguments from what are typically alleged to be none but analytic, a priori and necessary premises to the conclusion that God exists.
Many treatments of informal arguments assume the distinction between deductive and inductive arguments, a distinction which Govier 1987 dubs “the great divide,” emphasizing the latter over the former.
“Design arguments” come to mind, but like most philosophers, Hayek considers such arguments fallacious as arguments that we need to posit a designer to explain the emergence of order in nature.
This connects with investigation in the following way: when one investigates whether P, one assembles arguments or considerations in favour of P, and arguments or considerations against (i.e., arguments whose conclusions conflict with P).
Aquinas, Saint Thomas | atonement | Augustine, Saint | cosmological argument | Descartes, René: ontological argument | faith | God, arguments for the existence of: moral arguments | ontological arguments | teleology: teleological arguments for God’s existence | trinity
In An Essay Concerning Human Understanding (1690), he identified three kinds of arguments, the ad verecundiam, ad ignorantiam, and ad hominem arguments, each of which he contrasted with ad judicium arguments which are arguments based on “the foundations of knowledge and probability” and are reliable routes to truth and knowledge.
On this page, there are 20 sentence examples for arguments. They are all from high-quality sources and constantly processed by lengusa's machine learning routines.
Just use the " " button to fragment sentence examples and start your learning flow.
Example output from one of your searches:
In An Essay Concerning Human Understanding 1690 he identified three kinds of arguments the ad verecundiam ad ignorantiam and ad hominem arguments each of which he contrasted with ad judicium arguments which are arguments based on the foundations of knowledge and probability and are reliable routes to truth and knowledge