Search results
Appearance
There is a page named "Talk:Closing argument" on Wikipedia
- (talk) 22:45, 1 May 2013 (UTC) In the first paragraph, it says, "A closing argument may not contain any new information and may only use evidence introduced...1 KB (120 words) - 09:11, 11 January 2024
- between Closing argument. I believe that article that should take priority over this page, and this page's current title (Closing Arguments) should point...813 bytes (119 words) - 17:29, 30 January 2024
- French term La nouvelle rhetorique in 1958 to describe an approach to argument which is not reduced to application of formal rules of inference The idea...76 KB (11,890 words) - 15:12, 7 August 2011
- to be deleted. In case it's not that obvious for you guys: Plantinga's argument can be summarized as this: (1) It's possible (in a modal sense) that there...84 KB (12,792 words) - 04:39, 5 January 2024
- Moved to arguments page. --Trovatore (talk) 06:30, 16 July 2021 (UTC) Moved to arguments page. --Trovatore (talk) 06:30, 16 July 2021 (UTC) "In his 1891...13 KB (1,730 words) - 04:13, 23 May 2024
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Quine–Putnam indispensability argument/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review...28 KB (5,478 words) - 03:46, 9 February 2024
- [contradictory]" It is not contradictory. It is the whole point of the argument! This is what special relativity tells us. Betaneptune (talk) 07:28, 9...29 KB (4,697 words) - 20:33, 22 January 2024
- As it currently stands it presents the argument as if it a valid logical argument which it definitely is not. It downplays the refutations of it as if...98 KB (15,157 words) - 18:36, 8 April 2024
- This page is for arguments over the validity of 0.999.... This is not an archive; you may feel free to edit this page. Please use this page for comments...77 KB (12,605 words) - 12:59, 1 May 2024
- there is no argument to prove existence of God while in philosophy of religion we have many such argument such as Seddiqin,ontological argument, cosmological...38 KB (5,799 words) - 06:15, 17 February 2024
- should have cited it. The "A brief history of argument mapping" section of the chapter closely follows Argument map § History. There is essentially nothing...4 KB (514 words) - 11:07, 9 February 2024
- made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made...2 KB (203 words) - 00:34, 25 January 2024
- 2006 (UTC) I'm pleased that the criticism section now represents the arguments of academics, but I wonder if they are representative of the dominant...199 KB (30,102 words) - 16:25, 29 January 2023
- 86 bytes (0 words) - 17:29, 30 January 2024
- the argument "...will observe a mixture of oil and water separate because oil and water do not mix..." - I can see that this is written to avoid close paraphrasing...13 KB (1,556 words) - 14:18, 13 May 2022
- why not do active closers by team? That would keep the list devoid of the roaming "current established closers" who aren't closing at the moment -- those...23 KB (3,466 words) - 17:28, 30 January 2024
- Below is an argument about a link. I think that this argument is teetering dangerously close to personal attacks (although I did not see any). I did not...82 KB (13,417 words) - 15:49, 2 February 2023
- scientific criticism is that they were not based on sources that discuss this argument. If we can just use any sources to make our own claims, why not cite the...3 KB (315 words) - 11:08, 9 February 2024
- copied from Argument (disambiguation). The latter content was more inclusive (adding Argument principle) and conforms to MOS:DAB more closely. This leads...800 bytes (112 words) - 18:11, 15 June 2010
- heard it used so many times in discussion groups etc. I prefer to call it 'Argument from Wikipedia', in which amateur logicians link to the fallacy entries...22 KB (3,032 words) - 13:37, 25 January 2024
- isn't Fleming, isn't even close to looking like him. I am pinging the user, in case I have not fairly represented the arguments. SchroCat? I propose using
- this issue. His conception of Julius Cæsar has stirred up quite a lot of argument and we'll try to hear the pros and cons at Camp-Fire pretty much in full
- to Wikibooks. Tannersf 21:56, 3 December 2006 (UTC) There is a circular argument in The market->Setting a Price. "Now, we know that the price ends up somewhere