2020 journal article

Should Climate Scientists Fly?

Informal Logic, 40(2), 157–203.

By: J. Goodwin n

author keywords: argument; argumentation; argumentation theory; argumentative content knowledge; argument strategy; climate controversy; controversy; ethos; polylogue; systems thinking
UN Sustainable Development Goal Categories
13. Climate Action (OpenAlex)
Source: Crossref
Added: September 16, 2020

 I inquire into argument at the system level, exploring the controversy over whether climate scientists should fly. I document participants’ knowledge of a skeptical argument that because scientists fly, they cannot testify credibly about the climate emergency. I show how this argument has been managed by pro-climate action arguers, and how some climate scientists have developed parallel reasoning, articulating a sophisticated case why they will be more effective in the controversy if they fly less. Finally, I review some strategies arguers deploy to use the arguments of others against them. I argue that only by attending to argument-making at the system level can we understand how arguers come to know the resources for argument available in a controversy and to think strategically about how to use them. I call for more work on argument at the system level