2019 journal article

Sophistical refutations in the climate change debates


By: J. Goodwin n

co-author countries: United States of America 🇺🇸
author keywords: argumentation; argument; sophistry; climate communication; science communication; climate skepticism; fallacies; argumentative content knowledge; scientific consensus
Source: Web Of Science
Added: April 29, 2019

Abstract A case study of a short televised debate between a climate scientist and an advocate for climate skepticism provides the basis for developing a contemporary conception of sophistry. The sophist has a high degree of argumentative content knowledge – knowledge of a domain selected and structured in ways that are most germane for its use in making arguments. The sophist also makes the deliberate choice to argue for a disreputable view, one that goes against the views of the majority, or of the experts. Sophistry, drawing as it does on argumentative skill, is difficult to manage. The best approach is likely to refuse debate; but if debate is unavoidable, then the sophist must be met with equal skill. It will be hard to develop such skill, however, as long as the sophist’s view is thought to be disreputable.