Toulmin dies 10 Dec 20094 Oct 2017 One of my earliest and longest-lasting influences, Stephen Toulmin, has died. There is an obituary here [Hat tip Mata Kimasitayo]. People know many aspects of Toulmin’s works, but the one that most strongly influenced me was his evolutionary philosophy of cultural change, in his Human Understanding. Although it looks simplistic now, in fact his conclusions were generally on the money, in my view. Philosophy
Biology Alienus a me puto 5 Jul 2010 I have mentioned Terence’s line Homo sum: nihil humani a me alienum puto before. It is a declaration that all that is human is not foreign to me. But there are aliens, or we suppose on reasonable grounds that there are, and Stephen Hawking thinks we should not engage them,… Read More
Epistemology Religion and truth revisited 7 Jul 2009 Chris Schoen, he of the u n d e r v e r s e, has a piece up on Coyne’s challenge to the religious as to why Scientology’s absurd etiology of Xenu and souls in volcanoes is any less stupid than the etiologies of the Catholic, Jewish and Islamic… Read More
Metaphysics Aware: A Matter of Perspective 22 Oct 202322 Oct 2023 The next installment.:So, what is the explanatory target with the mind’s consciousness? What is it we physicalists cannot explain that needs the feels to account for? What, exactly, is missing from any possible physical account? Read More
I was a student of Toulmin’s long ago. I also respect what he was trying to do in Human Understanding, though I’ve been more influenced by Toulmin’s writings on causistry than any other part of his work.
I still have a copy of Foresight and Understanding from my undergrad course, Science and Society, taught by Everett Mendelsohn….
I have a much thumbed and very battered copy of Everett Mendelsohn’s Introduction to Mathematical Logic!
I too was much influenced by Toulmin in my youth and to some extent continue to be so. His The Origins of Time written with his wife June Goodfield changed the way I viewed history fairly substantially. I loved the cat fights that Toulmin and Lakatos used to have.
I could never get very far with Human Understanding, but in the past couple of years I have read and re-read The Uses of Argument, which I continue to find a very thought-provoking book.
It looks as if the writer of the obituary got someone to explain Toulmin’s ideas to her and got them a bit garbled in her notes. Sample 1: “Toulmin’s most influential work was the Toulmin Model of Argumentation. In it, he identified six elements of a persuasive argument: claim, grounds, arrant, backing, qualifier and rebuttal.” D’oh! Sample 2: “Arguing against the absolute truth advocated in Plato’s idealized formal logic, Toulmin said that truth can be relative. . . . After pinpointing absolutism’s dearth of practical value, Toulmin developed a new type of argument, called practical arguments.” Oh, dear.
Too many years ago, I got drunk with Toulmin. As the bottle neared “empty”, he started making faintly apocalyptic noises! I recall responding with an inebriated version of “WTF!” Nonetheless, I think his longtime interest in the notion of ‘understanding’ was warranted, not least because it irritated philosophic philistines.
I read only some second hand evaluations of his book(s) in Finnish main newspaper. I got an intuition that he was very very wise man I should study more but his books were not translated in finnish. Except Cosmopolis but that got not so well reputations here and I didn’t interest it. (I never forget how hard for me it was to read Dennett in foreign language).