The normative structure of case study argumentation
Metaphilosophy 24 (3):207-226 (1993)
| Abstract | This article has no associated abstract. (fix it) | |||||||||
| 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: 5,631 |
| External links |
 |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesDouglas N. Walton (2008). Argumentation Schemes. Cambridge University Press.
Jan-R. Sieckmann (2003). Why Non-Monotonic Logic is Inadequate to Represent Balancing Arguments. Artificial Intelligence and Law 11 (2-3):211-219.
Nancy Green (2010). Representation of Argumentation in Text with Rhetorical Structure Theory. Argumentation 24 (2):181-196.
Richard Andrews (2009). A Case Study of Argumentation at Undergraduate Level in History. Argumentation 23 (4):547-558.
A. P. Norman (2001). The Normative Structure of Adjudicative Dialogue. Argumentation 15 (4):489-498.
Lilian Bermejo-Luque (2010). Intrinsic Versus Instrumental Values of Argumentation: The Rhetorical Dimension of Argumentation. Argumentation 24 (4):453-474.
ZoraidaMendiwelso Bendek (2002). Citizens of the Future: Beyond Normative Conditions Through the Emergence of Desirable Collective Properties. Journal of Business Ethics 39 (1-2):189 - 195.
A. R. Gini (1985). The Case Method: A Perspective. Journal of Business Ethics 4 (4):351 - 352.
Douglas N. Walton (2000). Case Study of the Use of a Circumstantial Ad Hominem in Political Argumentation. Philosophy and Rhetoric 33 (2):101-115.
Douglas Walton (2002). The Sunk Costs Fallacy or Argument From Waste. Argumentation 16 (4):473-503.
Analytics
Monthly downloads
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
|
Added to index2010-08-10Total downloads0Recent downloads (6 months)0How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
