<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><xml><records><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Čana, Tomáš</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Dummett o kruhovosti pri argumentovaní</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Filozofia</style></secondary-title><translated-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Dummett on the Circularity in the Argumentation</style></translated-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Argument</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Circularity</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Deduction</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Dummett</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">epistemology</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Explanatory role</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">justification</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Logic</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Suasive role</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2018</style></year></dates><urls><web-urls><url><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">http://www.klemens.sav.sk/fiusav/doc/filozofia/2018/6/469-480.pdf</style></url></web-urls></urls><number><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">6</style></number><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">73</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">469-480</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Slovak</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">This paper deals with the distinction between two roles of a deductive argument in the communication: &lt;em&gt;explanatory&lt;/em&gt; and &lt;em&gt;suasive&lt;/em&gt;. The distinction was hinted out by Michael Dummett, in his &lt;em&gt;The justification of deduction&lt;/em&gt;. The paper attempts to show various controversial consequences of the distinction. For example, there is a belief that, regarding the arguments used in the explanatory mode, obvious threat of circularity is not in fact “interesting”. Quite the opposite, it seems to be something natural. The aim of the paper is to critically reconsider the distinction between the roles of a deductive argument as well as its consequences.</style></abstract><work-type><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">State</style></work-type><custom2><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Articles</style></custom2><custom3><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">469480</style></custom3></record></records></xml>