On Premise Acceptability ——A Study From Epistemological Approaches

In a long period of time,the soundness criterion,premises are true and form is valid,was regarded as the central criterion in argument evaluation.Ever since it was questioned,in informal logic,acceptability is often used as a substitution of truth.Considerations about acceptability can be dated back into the claim against alethic criteria from Hamblin,who pointed out that truth as a requirement of premises is neither sufficient nor necessary,giving out two alternative substitutions: a sort of epistemic criteria in a stronger sense,and so-called dialectic criteria in a weaker sense which he advocates.Hamblin advocates for premises being accepted to replace truth.Since acceptance shows relativity and subjectivity,Johnson and Govier reformed acceptance into acceptability in a normative sense,namely as rational acceptance or believing.However,worrying about the deficiency of acceptability will reduce itself into acceptance in practice,following invasion of rhetoric,Johnson brought truth back as a criterion for argument evaluation to defend a position of logic,but it also causes a problem of integrity.Though epistemic criterion was abandoned by Hamblin,acceptability and truth still become an issue in epistemological approaches.Different from independent uses of criteria of acceptability and truth,Lumer grasped those two ideas at the same time,understanding acceptability as the same level as truth via adding highly probable and verisimilitude,using subjective justifications for eliminating falsity.While Pinto’s acceptability is like what Govier says,but he permit good argument with false premises.From those epistemic approach,justification is different from acceptability,but epistemological requirement of ration still need acceptability to be justified or likewise.While Freeman started from a foundationalist understanding of premise,using “presumption” to define acceptability as well as link it to truth.His ternary definition of acceptability preserves the expectation of truth as well as the relativity of dialectic,warrants an engagement of ration in acceptability via high requirements in basic dialectic situation.From all those discussions about truth,acceptance,acceptability of premises and their relations,this essay advocates an idea of multi-aspects consideration of premise acceptability.An ideal criterion of premise appraisal should cover various aspects of premise quality,but in practice,we often chose specific aspect according to purposes.Though there is no uniform answer of acceptability,and it only focus on certain aspects of premise’s quality,the perspective of this discussion has no doubt generated a positive meaning towards a comprehensive understanding the appraisal of premises and acceptability.