In previous work I argued against (i) the likelihood of finding a theoretically sound foundation for the linked/convergent distinction and (ii) the utility of the distinction even if a sound theoretical basis could be found. Here I subject Douglas Walton’s comprehensive discussion of the linked/convergent distinction found in Argument Structure: A Pragmatic Theory to careful scrutiny and argue that at best Walton’s theory remains incomplete and that attempts to fill out the details will run afoul of at least one of the problems adduced above—i.e., result in either a theoretically unsound distinction or a theoretically sound, but unnecessary distinction.
Copyright © 2007, Informal Logic. This article first appeared in Informal Logic: 27:1 (2007), 5-25.
Please note that downloads of the article are for private/personal use only.
Goddu, G.C. "Walton on Argument Structure." Informal Logic 27, no. 1 (2007): 5-25.