ABSTRACT
In this commentary, I discuss three chapters on the discipline specificity of scientific reasoning and argumentation and the educational implications of this specificity. Although the authors of these chapters have a very differentiated view on scientific reasoning and argumentation in different disciplines, they overestimate the (sub-)discipline specificity. Single disciplines comprise very heterogeneous sets of reasoning and argumentation types, and the sets of different disciplines overlap substantially. Therefore, certain types of reasoning or argumentation should not be framed as (sub-)discipline-specific activities, when they are taught in a certain school subject or discipline. Instead, it is preferable to show students that the types of reasoning and argumentation they get to know in a certain (sub-)discipline are also applicable in other (sub-)disciplines.
