![« Question-Begging Arguments as Ones that do not Extend Knowledge » /home/lecreumo/public html/wp content/uploads/2021/10/capture décran le 2021 10 28 à 11.22.10](https://www.lecre.umontreal.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/capture-décran-le-2021-10-28-à-11.22.10-200x200.png)
« Question-Begging Arguments as Ones that do not Extend Knowledge »
Rainer Ebert signe un article intitulé « Question-Begging Arguments as Ones that do not Extend Knowledge » et paru dans Philosophy and Progress.
Résumé
In this article, I propose a formal criterion that distinguishes between deductively valid arguments that do and do not beg the question. I define the concept of a Never-failing Minimally Competent Knower (NMCK) and suggest that an argument begs the question just in case it cannot possibly assist an NMCK in extending his or her knowledge.