r 
greater than at present. Or possibly, a 
decision was made on presumed suburban reli-
ance on automobile transport because of 
greater affluence; that could have the effect 
of a selffulfilling prophecy. In any event, 
decisions are made, if not done out of negli-
gence, for reasons. To decide between the 
two analyses, one would want to ask the rea-
sons for the original deCision for the pres-
ent level of service. If City Hall made a 

* 

15 

* 

potential usage study, the citizens are 
guilty of a Contrary-to-Fact fallacy. If no 
such study was made, there would not appear 
to be an~ fallacy--not as the argument is 
stated, 1n any event. 

* 

Richard W. Brooks 
Oakland university 
Rochester, Michigan 

BOOK REVIEW 

Dialectics: A Controversy-Oriented Approach 
to the TheorS of Knowledge, Nicholas Rescher. Al any: State University of 
New York Press, 1977. Pp. 218 + xiv. 
Cloth. 

Statement of Purpose. For Rescher, dialectic 
1S the d1sc1pllne of "disputation, debate and 
rational controversy." He says in the Pre-
face that the book "explores a disputational 
approach to inquiry" and in the introd1.l.l=tion' 
that "the goal of this exploration is the 
development of a dialectical model for the 
rationalization of cognitive methodology--
scientific methodologY specifically includ-
ed. n (xii) It is "the communal and contro-
versy-oriented aspects of rational argumedta p 
tion and inquiry" which he wants to illumi-
nate and to contrast with "the cognitive 

.' solipsism of the Cartesian approach." 
Accordingly, the first three chapters of the 
book present Rescher's account of dialectic 
--the basic outlines, as it were, of rational 
controversy; the last four chapters apply 
that account in a consideration of issues in 

f epistemology and the philosophy of science. 
t Table of Contents 
lOne. The disputational background of dialec-
t' tic: the structure of formal disputation. 
. TWo. Some dialectical tools: burden of 

proof, presumption, and plausibility. 
Three. Unilateral dialectics: a disputa-

tional model of inquiry. 
~ur. Facets of "dialectical logic". 
Five. What justifies the dialectical rational 

of probative rationality. 
Six. A dialectically based critique of 

skepticism. 
Seven. Evolutionary epistemology and the. 

burden of proof. 
Eight. The disputational model of scientific 

inquiry. 

Special Features 

****Ch. 1 presents a method for representing 
the structure of a "formal disputation" in 

which there are two participants: someone 
defending a thesis (the proponent) and some-
one challenging that thesis (the opponent~. 
In this method, there are three fundamental 
mOves: 1) categorical assertion (available 
only ,to the proponent); 2) cautious assertion 
(which is -available only to the opponent and 
amounts to saying IIp is the case for all that 
you have shown") and 3) provisoed assertion 
(which amounts to saying IIp generally or 
usually Or ordinarily obtains, provided that 
Qn and is available to either participant in 
combination with the categorical or cautious 
assertion of Q). Various "dialectical 
countermoves" are built up out of these 
fundamental moves and fairly complex courses 
of formal disputation can be represented 
thereby. 
****Ch. 2 explains the concepts of burden of 
proof and presumption, orienting itself from 
the legal tradition. Roughly, to establish 
a presumption is to shift the burden of 
proof. These concepts, together with the 
concept of plaUSibility, are taken to be 
central in the adjudication of a disputation. 
As a result, "A shared procedure for the 
assessment of plausibility and the allocation 
of presumption thus emerges as a critical 
factor in dialectic--indeed as one of the 
crucial presuppositions of rationality 
throughout the context of rational discus-
sion." 

****Ch. 3 "explores the doctrine that dis-
putation and debate may be taken as a para-
digmatic model for the general process of 
reasoning in the pursuit of truth". The 
root idea is that dialectic provides a method 
of "evidential cost-benefit analysis"--i.e., 
of testing the evidential support of ideas 
and theses. 

!! 
I 
! 

I 



****Ch. 4 attempts to show that although 
dialectical reasoning "seemingly departs from 
that in orthodox logic in various ways", it 
does not in fact violate the canons of 
orthodox logic. 

****Chs. 5-7 address the question "just what 
are the credentials of the established pro-
bative rules--the standard machinery of 
evidence, plausibility, presumption, etc.?" 

* 

The Informal Logic Newsletter is published 
by the ed~tors. Annual subscriptions are $4 
for individuals and $8 for institutions, 
payable to: Informal Logic Newsletter: The 
Newsletter will be published a minimum of 
three times a year, normally in early Fall, 
early Winter, and Spring, with supplementary 

* 

16 

* 

* 

A fairly complex response to skepticism is 
developed in the course of answering this 
question. 
****Ch. 8 illustrates a number of ways in 
which a "disputational model" shows promise 
for illuminating aspects of scientific 
inquiry. 

* 

Robert C. Pinto 
Department of Philosopny 
University of Windsor 

issues appearing from time to time. All sub-
scriptions begin with the early Fall number; 
late subscribers receive the year's back 
issues. Address all communications to: The 
Editors, Informal Logic Newsletter, Depart-
ment of Philosophy, University of Windsor, 
Windsor, Ontario N9B 3P4, Canada. 

* 

PIllA ... ' 
AND 

tITIJIl'TURIJ 
an interdisciplinary journal of literary 

and philosophical studies 

Editor: Denis Dutton 
Corresponding Editors: Jesse Kalin, Martha Nussbaum 

o Since its first appearance in 1976, Philosophy and Literature has established 
itself as a lively forum for the best new work in a challenging and exciting interdis-
ciplinary field. The journal features philosophical interpretations of literature, 
literary investigations of classic works of philosophy, articles on the aesthetics of 
literature, theory of criticism, and relations between philosophy and the dramatic 
media of theatre and film. 

o Subscriptions are available to individuals for $7, $10, and $12 (2, 3, and 4 
years). The journal is published twice each year. A sample copy may be had post-
paid from the publisher for $1. 

Philosophy and Literature 
Is published by 

The University of Michigan-Dearborn 
Dearborn, Michigan 48128