more from this thinker | more from this text
Full Idea
A 'rebut' of an argument establishes that its conclusion is not the case. An 'undercut' of the argument shows that the premises do not support that conclusion.
Gist of Idea
You can 'rebut' an argument's conclusion, or 'undercut' its premises
Source
G. Aldo Antonelli (Non-Monotonic Logic [2014], 3.2)
Book Ref
'Stanford Online Encyclopaedia of Philosophy', ed/tr. Stanford University [plato.stanford.edu], p.11
| 3993 | Arguments are nearly always open to challenge, but they help to explain a position rather than force people to believe [Lewis] |
| 20220 | Objection by counterexample is weak, because it only reveals inaccuracies in one theory [Zagzebski] |
| 6856 | Valid arguments can be rejected by challenging the premises or presuppositions [Martin,M] |
| 19215 | Arguers often turn the opponent's modus ponens into their own modus tollens [Merricks] |
| 19504 | My modus ponens might be your modus tollens [Pritchard,D] |
| 23769 | Promoting an ontology by its implied good metaphysic is an 'argument-by-display' [Williams,NE] |
| 19115 | You can 'rebut' an argument's conclusion, or 'undercut' its premises [Antonelli] |
| 18405 | A 'teepee' argument has several mutually supporting planks to it [Cappelen/Dever] |
| 19023 | Slippery slope arguments are challenges to show where a non-arbitrary boundary lies [Vetter] |