Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Managing the Complexity of Dialogues in Context: A Data-Driven Discovery Method for Dialectical Reply Structures.Olena Yaskorska-Shah - 2021 - Argumentation 35 (4):551-580.
    Current formal dialectical models postulate normative rules that enable discussants to conduct dialogical interactions without committing fallacies. Though the rules for conducting a dialogue are supposed to apply to interactions between actual arguers, they are without exception theoretically motivated. This creates a gap between model and reality, because dialogue participants typically leave important content-related elements implicit. Therefore, analysts cannot readily relate normative rules to actual debates in ways that will be empirically confirmable. This paper details a new, data-driven method for (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Data-Driven Dialogue Models: Applying Formal and Computational Tools to the Study of Financial And Moral Dialogues.Olena Yaskorska-Shah - 2020 - Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric 63 (1):185-208.
    This paper proposes two formal models for understanding real-life dialogues, aimed at capturing argumentative structures performatively enacted during conversations. In the course of the investigation, two types of discourse with a high degree of well-structured argumentation were chosen: moral debate and financial communication. The research project found itself confronted by a need to analyse, structure and formally describe large volumes of textual data, where this called for the application of computational tools. It is expected that the results of the proposed (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
    		•
  • Towards Formal Representation and Evaluation of Arguments.Marcin Selinger - 2014 - Argumentation 28 (3):379-393.
    The aim of this paper is to propose foundations for a formal model of representation and numerical evaluation of a possibly broad class of arguments, including those that occur in natural discourse. Since one of the most characteristic features of everyday argumentation is the occurrence of convergent reasoning, special attention should be paid to the operation ⊕, which allows us to calculate the logical force of convergent arguments with an accuracy not offered by other approaches.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   12 citations  
  • From Speech Acts to Semantics.Jim Mackenzie - 2014 - Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric 36 (1):121-142.
    Frege introduced the notion of pragmatic force as what distinguishes statements from questions. This distinction was elaborated by Wittgenstein in his later works, and systematised as an account of different kinds of speech acts in formal dialogue theory by Hamblin. It lies at the heart of the inferential semantics more recently developed by Brandom. The present paper attempts to sketch some of the relations between these developments.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • The Lvov–Warsaw School as a Source of Inspiration for Argumentation Theory.Marcin Koszowy & Michał Araszkiewicz - 2014 - Argumentation 28 (3):283-300.
    The thesis of the paper holds that some future developments of argumentation theory may be inspired by the rich logico-methodological legacy of the Lvov–Warsaw School (LWS), the Polish research movement that was most active from 1895 to 1939. As a selection of ideas of the LWS which exploit both formal and pragmatic aspects of the force of argument, we present: Ajdukiewicz’s account of reasoning and inference, Bocheński’s analyses of superstitions or dogmas, and Frydman’s constructive approach to legal interpretation. This paper (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  • Processing Topics from the Beneficial Cognitive Model in Partially and Over-Successful Persuasion Dialogues.Kamila Debowska-Kozlowska - 2014 - Argumentation 28 (3):325-339.
    A persuasion dialogue is a dialogue in which a conflict between agents with respect to their points of view arises at the beginning of the talk and the agents have the shared, global goal of resolving the conflict and at least one agent has the persuasive aim to convince the other party to accept an opposing point of view. I argue that the persuasive force of argument may have not only extreme values but also intermediate strength. That is, I wish (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  • “Agreement Builds and Disagreement Destroys:” How Polish Undergraduates and Graduates Understand Interpersonal Arguing.Kamila Dębowska-Kozłowska & Dale Hample - 2022 - Argumentation 36 (3):365-392.
    This is a descriptive study (_N_ = 243) of how Polish undergraduates and graduates perceive face to face arguing. We had some reasons to suppose that they would not be especially aggressive. The Polish culture has a number of proverbs warning against combative arguing, with “agreement builds and disagreement destroys” being illustrative. In addition, up until 1989 public dissent and open disagreements were suppressed by the government, and older generations often found it prudent to avoid arguing. We compared Polish results (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
    		•
  • The Polish School of Argumentation: A Manifesto.Katarzyna Budzynska, Michal Araszkiewicz, Barbara Bogołȩbska, Piotr Cap, Tadeusz Ciecierski, Kamila Debowska-Kozlowska, Barbara Dunin-Kȩplicz, Marcin Dziubiński, Michał Federowicz, Anna Gomolińska, Andrzej Grabowski, Teresa Hołówka, Łukasz Jochemczyk, Magdalena Kacprzak, Paweł Kawalec, Maciej Kielar, Andrzej Kisielewicz, Marcin Koszowy, Robert Kublikowski, Piotr Kulicki, Anna Kuzio, Piotr Lewiński, Jakub Z. Lichański, Jacek Malinowski, Witold Marciszewski, Edward Nieznański, Janina Pietrzak, Jerzy Pogonowski, Tomasz A. Puczyłowski, Jolanta Rytel, Anna Sawicka, Marcin Selinger, Andrzej Skowron, Joanna Skulska, Marek Smolak, Małgorzata Sokół, Agnieszka Sowińska, Piotr Stalmaszczyk, Tomasz Stawecki, Jarosław Stepaniuk, Alina Strachocka, Wojciech Suchoń, Krzysztof Szymanek, Justyna Tomczyk, Robert Trypuz, Kazimierz Trzȩsicki, Mariusz Urbański, Ewa Wasilewska-Kamińska, Krzysztof A. Wieczorek, Maciej Witek, Urszula Wybraniec-Skardowska, Olena Yaskorska, Maria Załȩska, Konrad Zdanowski & Żure - 2014 - Argumentation 28 (3):267-282.
    Building on our diverse research traditions in the study of reasoning, language and communication, the Polish School of Argumentation integrates various disciplines and institutions across Poland in which scholars are dedicated to understanding the phenomenon of the force of argument. Our primary goal is to craft a methodological programme and establish organisational infrastructure: this is the first key step in facilitating and fostering our research movement, which joins people with a common research focus, complementary skills and an enthusiasm to work (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • Preface: From Pragmatics and Dialectics to Argument Studies.Katarzyna Budzynska, Frans H. Van Eemeren & Marcin Koszowy - 2014 - Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric 36 (1):7-22.
    Pragmatics and dialectics are two disciplines which have been amongst the first and most important partners for argument studies in the exploration of the complex realm of communication. Treating argumentation as a construct consisting of premises and conclusion allows for investigating some interesting properties of the phenomenon of reasoning, but does not capture a variety of aspects related to the usage of natural language and dialogical context in which real-life argumentation is typically embedded. This special issue explores some of the (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • The Structure of Arguments from Deontic Authority and How to Successfully Attack Them.Michał Araszkiewicz & Marcin Koszowy - forthcoming - Argumentation:1-28.
    Despite increasing interest in studying arguments from deontic authority of the general form “(1) $$\delta$$ δ is a deontic authority in institution $$\varOmega$$ Ω ; (2) according to $$\delta$$ δ, I should do $$\alpha$$ α, C: therefore, (3) I should do $$\alpha$$ α ”, the state of the art models are not capable of grasping their complexity. The existing sets of critical questions assigned to this argumentation scheme seem to conflate two problems: whether a person is subject to an authority (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
    		•