The Limits of the Dialogue Model of Argument
Argumentation 12 (2):325-339 (1998)
| Abstract | The paper's thesis is that dialogue is not an adequate model for all types of argument. The position of Walton is taken as the contrary view. The paper provides a set of descriptions of dialogues in which arguments feature in the order of the increasing complexity of the argument presentation at each turn of the dialogue, and argues that when arguments of great complexity are traded, the exchanges between arguers are turns of a dialogue only in an extended or metaphorical sense. It argues that many of the properties of engaged back-and-forth exchanges of paradigmatic argument dialogues are not found in âsoloâ arguments, and that at least some of the norms appropriate to the former type of argument, such as some of the pragma-dialectical rules of van Eemeren and Grootendorst's model, do not apply to the latter | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | No categories specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,701 |
| External links |
 |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesJan Albert Van Laar (2007). One-Sided Arguments. Synthese 154 (2).
Jan Albert Van Laar (2007). One-Sided Arguments. Synthese 154 (2):307 - 327.
Henry Prakken (2011). Argumentation Without Arguments. Argumentation 25 (2):171-184.
Douglas Walton (1999). Profiles of Dialogue for Evaluating Arguments From Ignorance. Argumentation 13 (1):53-71.
Douglas Walton (2002). The Sunk Costs Fallacy or Argument From Waste. Argumentation 16 (4):473-503.
Eddo Rigotti & Sara Greco Morasso (2010). Comparing the Argumentum Model of Topics to Other Contemporary Approaches to Argument Schemes: The Procedural and Material Components. Argumentation 24 (4):489-512.
Douglas Walton (2011). A Dialogue Model of Belief. Argument and Computation 1 (1):23-46.
T. J. M. Bench-Capon, T. Geldard & P. H. Leng (2000). A Method for the Computational Modelling of Dialectical Argument with Dialogue Games. Artificial Intelligence and Law 8 (2-3).
H. Prakken & G. Sartor (1996). A Dialectical Model of Assessing Conflicting Arguments in Legal Reasoning. Artificial Intelligence and Law 4 (3-4):331-368.
John L. Yearwood & Andrew Stranieri (2006). Deliberative Discourse and Reasoning From Generic Argument Structures. AI and Society 23 (3):353-377.
Thomas F. Gordon, Henry Prakken & Douglas N. Walton (2007). The Carneades Model of Argument and Burden of Proof. Artificial Intelligence 171 (10-15):875-896.
Jürgen Dümont (1999). Putnam's Model-Theoretic Argument(S). A Detailed Reconstruction. Journal for General Philosophy of Science 30 (2):341-364.
Nicholas J. J. Smith (2008). Why Sense Cannot Be Made of Vague Identity. Noûs 42 (1):1–16.
Iris Einheuser (2010). The Model-Theoretic Argument Against Quantifying Over Everything. Dialectica 64 (2):237-246.
Yiftach J. H. Fehige (2010). The "Art of Dialogue" and the Christian-Jewish Encounter. A First Approach. Jahrbuch für Religionsphilosophie 9:67-93.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2010-09-11Total downloads8 ( #123,161 of 549,122 )Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,361 of 549,122 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
