Abstract
This paper makes the case for what we call ‘logic-checking’. The paper begins by providing an overview of the development of fact-checking and of how fact-checking functions. As part of this discussion, we identify some limitations of fact-checking, including its reliance on testimony to function as intended. Such considerations, we argue, motivate logic-checking, which, when well articulated, can demonstrate that a piece of reasoning is flawed to an audience. What logic-checking involves is set out and examples of logic-checking are provided. The objection that experts in informal logic conducting logic-checking will be biased, thus undermining the whole enterprise, is considered and rejected. © 2025 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 201-213 |
| Number of pages | 13 |
| Journal | Social Epistemology |
| Volume | 40 |
| Issue number | 2 |
| Online published | 18 Sept 2025 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - Mar 2026 |
Research Keywords
- Critical thinking
- fact-checking
- public discourse
- fake news
Publisher's Copyright Statement
- COPYRIGHT TERMS OF DEPOSITED POSTPRINT FILE: This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in Social Epistemology on 18th September 2025, available online: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/02691728.2025.2549830
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Beyond Fact-Checking: The Importance of Logic-Checking in Public Discourse'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver