La enseñanza de la lógica y el análisis del texto argumentativo

Abstract

There exists a gap between partisans of New Rhetoric and Informal Logic. In agreement with the first theory, mathematics proves the Truth of conclusions from the Truth of premises, while argumentation persuades with metaphors, analogies, and paradigmatic examples. This paper looks to show–even in the most primitive levels of logical proof–that the use of these elements is necessary, especially in the first stages of learning. This training facilitates the analysis of the arguments.