추가 적립 안내

논거를 펼치는 것은 다른 진술을 근거로 제시하면서 주장이나 요구를 관철하고자 하는 것이다. 이 책은 논거와 논증을 논리적으로 분석하는 방법을 설명하는 입문서이자, 논증 텍스트를 분석하고 비판하는 법을 보여주는 지침서이다. 1장에서는 논증을 위한 심리적, 인식론적, 문화적 측면의 문제를 다룬다. 2장에서는 논리학의 기본 개념을 살펴보고, 연역 및 귀납 논거의 중요한 형식들을 소개한다. 3장에서는 다양한 예문 텍스트에 사용된 논거를 분석한다. 이를 바탕으로 논증 분석을 도와주는 질문과 지침을 정리한다.

한국어판 서문 ························································································ 5
감사 ································································································· 9
들어가는 말 ················································································· 15

1. 논증과 논증 분석 ·········································································· 25
1.1 추론과 논증 ···················································································· 25
1.2 논증과 직관 ················································································· 30
1.2.1 연상, 유추 및 기타 추론 메커니즘 ········································ 30
1.2.2 신경망 ·············································································· 35
1.2.3 직관의 약점 ······································································· 42
1.2.4 논증을 통한 통제 ······················································ 44
1.3 논증과 인식 ······································································· 47
1.3.1 세계상 ············································································· 47
1.3.2. 해양동물을 이용한 사고 실험 ················································ 49
1.3.3 세계상의 구성과 상대성 ························································· 50
1.3.4 일반화와 예측 ·············································································· 56
1.3.5 설명 ··········································································· 58
1.3.6 귀납과 연역 ······································································· 63
1.3.7 인간 인식의 가설?연역적 성격 ························································· 66
1.3.8 논증과 의사소통 ············································································ 71
1.4 논증과 문화 ·························································································· 74
1.4.1 논증의 문화적 맥락 ··································································· 74
1.4.2 논증 교육? ·············································································· 78
1.4.3 논증과 관련된 사회적 상황 ······························· 84
1.4.4 합리성의 위기? ·································································· 90
1.4.5 논증은 권력행사인가? ······················································· 94

2. 논거의 구성 ································································ 99
2.1 의미론 및 의사소통 이론적 토대 ······································ 99
2.1.1 언어표현, 진술, 사실관계 ······································· 99
2.1.2 사용과 언급, 대상언어와 메타언어 ································· 102
2.1.3 해석 ················································································· 104
2.1.4 명제: 지시와 서술 ·································································· 107
2.1.5 표면상의 의견 일치와 표면상의 의견 불일치 ······················· 112
2.1.6 언어표현의 엄밀화 ···························································· 114
2.1.7 엄밀화의 대가와 유용성, 그리고 기회 ······························· 120
2.1.8 정의 ·················································································· 124
2.2 논거의 논리적 분석 ····················································· 127
2.2.1 전제와 결론, 유효성과 관련성 ········································· 127
2.2.2 논리학의 과제 ··············································· 132
2.2.3 일상 언어 속의 논거 ························································· 136
2.2.4 발상과 근거 ······················································ 146
2.3 연역논거 ········································································ 151
2.3.1 연역논거의 기능 ···························································· 151
2.3.2 타당성과 논증 형식 ····························································· 154
2.3.3 조건논거 ················································································ 160
2.3.4 결론의 거짓으로 전제를 판단하기: 귀류법 ··································· 164
2.3.5 진리표와 타당성 ······························································ 168
2.3.6 정언 진술과 삼단논법 ····························································· 175
2.3.7 논리적 엄밀성과 일상 언어 ······························································186
2.4 귀납논거 ······················································································· 190
2.4.1 귀납논거의 특성 ············································································ 190
2.4.2 통계추론 오류 ····························································· 193
2.4.3 권위에 근거한 논거 ? 부정적 권위에 근거한 논거 ··················· 200
2.4.4 유추에 근거한 논거 ········································································ 205
2.4.5 인과논거 ····························································· 208
2.5 툴민의 논증 분석 도식 ··························································· 212

3. 생활 속의 논증 ·················································· 217
3.1 일상생활 논증 분석 ········································································ 217
3.1.1 논거와 논증 ······································································ 217
3.1.2 선형적 텍스트와 계층적 논증 구조 ·········································· 224
3.1.3 규범적 결론이 포함된 논거 ·························································· 231
3.1.4 화제 전환, 기분, 관계: 대학생 토론 ····························· 236
3.1.5 선두 언어표현들이 연계되어 있는 암시적 논증: 사설 ················· 245
3.1.6 사회적 맥락에서의 논증: 설명과 세계상 ·························· 263
3.2 논증 분석을 위한 기본 질문 ···················································· 286
3.2.1 논증 자체가 이뤄지고 있는가? ······················································ 289
3.2.2 중심 선두 언어표현은 무엇인가? 혹시 여러 개가 있는가? ·············· 290
3.2.3 선두 언어표현의 내용이 기술적인가 아니면 규범적인가? ················ 291
3.2.4 선두 언어표현과 논증이 특정한 세계상을 나타내는가? ···················· 292
3.2.5 어떤 논거가 제시되는가? ····························································· 293
3.2.6 논거 사이에 어떤 연관이 있는가? ·········································· 295
3.2.7 논증이 어떻게 개관될 수 있는가? ············································ 298
3.2.8 어떤 논거 유형에 해당하는가? ········································· 299
3.2.9 규범적 결론이 담긴 논거는 어떻게 분석해야 하는가? ··················· 300
3.2.10 어떤 암시적 진술을 명시적으로 밝혀야 하는가? ······················· 303
3.2.11 논거가 올바른가? 명백한 추론 오류가 있는가? ················· 304
3.2.12 찬반 논거를 어떻게 견줘볼 수 있는가? ········································ 304
3.2.13 비객관성이 논거를 따져보기 힘들게 하는가? ····························· 308

4. 덧붙이는 말 ·········································································· 317

5. 복습 문제 ··············································································· 321

6. 용어 설명 ···················································································· 341

7. 참고문헌 ············································································ 361

8. 색인 ······················································································· 371

자유로운 놀이나 상상, 감정 등과 관련해서는 논리를 따지지 않아도 괜찮을 때가 있다. 추측하고 가늠하는 것으로 만족하고, 있을 수 있는 오류의 위험성을 충분히 감안한 경우에는 직관적 추론과 “퍼지 논리” 방식의 불명확한 논거에 의존해도 좋다. 그러나 우리의 물리적"E사회적 환경 모델에 중요한 측면을 추가하거나 중요한 행위를 계획할 때는, 전통 논리학에서 벗어날 수 없다. 교량 건축기사 나 의사, 전기기술자 같은 사람이 작업할 때 논리의 진리치와 기준을 무시한다면 머지않아 법에 저촉될 것이다. 반면에 늦은 밤 지인들과의 모임에서 정치적 주제에 관해서 발언하거나, 축구 경기를 보면서 논란이 된 골의 이전 상황에 대해서 말하는 사람은 대화 상대방이 자신의 논거를 논리적으로 엄격히 따지지는 않을 것이라고 생각해도 된다. 하지만 이런 경우에도 명백한 추론 오류는 가끔씩 반박에 부딪힌다. 돌팔이 의사나 종교 지도자의 정령, 천사, 기의 흐름, 혼령 등에 대한 이야기도 결국은 전제의 유효성이나 관련성보다는 논거가 주는 감성적 효과에 따라 평가된다. 의사, 정치가, 교사, 기술자, 예술가부터 온갖 예언자에 이르기까지 그들의 발언을 얼마나 엄격히 따져봐야 하는지는 쉽게 결정할 수 없다. 그러나 어쨌든 올바르지 못한 논거로 인해 고통과 불행이 따르지 않을지 살펴보는 것이 좋다.
일상생활의 많은 상황에서도 논거를 펼치는 사람과 논거를 받는 사람이 결론의 참 여부에 대하여 큰 관심을 가지기 때문에, 일상생활의 논증을 검증할 때도 논리적 관점을 포기해서는 안 된다. 이러한 검증을 하는 데 앞 장들에서 살펴본 개별 논거에 대한 면밀한 분석이 중요한 전제가 된다. 그러므로 이제 일상생활에 사용되는 논증의 실제 구조를 기술하고, 논리의 기준으로 따져봐야 할 것이다. 그렇게 하지 않으면 펼쳐진 도면의 미적 품질만 보고 건축 공학적 측면을 살펴보지 않는 건축가와 다를 바가 없다.