Computational dialectic and rhetorical invention
AI and Society (forthcoming)
| Abstract | This paper has three dimensions, historical, theoretical and social. The historical dimension is to show how the Ciceronian system of dialectical argumentation served as a precursor to computational models of argumentation schemes such as Araucaria and Carneades. The theoretical dimension is to show concretely how these argumentation schemes reveal the interdependency of rhetoric and logic, and so the interdependency of the normative with the empirical. It does this by identifying points of disagreement in a dialectical format through using argumentation schemes and critical questions. The social dimension is to show how the Ciceronian dialectical viewpoint integrates with the use of computational tools that can be used to support the principle of reason-based deliberation and facilitate deliberative democracy. | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | ||||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,709 |
| External links |
 |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesBart Verheij (2003). Dialectical Argumentation with Argumentation Schemes: An Approach to Legal Logic. Artificial Intelligence and Law 11 (2-3):167-195.
Lilian Bermejo-Luque (2010). Intrinsic Versus Instrumental Values of Argumentation: The Rhetorical Dimension of Argumentation. Argumentation 24 (4):453-474.
Douglas N. Walton (2008). Argumentation Schemes. Cambridge University Press.
Frans H. van Eemeren & Peter Houtlosser (2000). Rhetorical Analysis Within a Pragma-Dialectical Framework. Argumentation 14 (3):293-305.
Frans H. Eemeren (2013). In What Sense Do Modern Argumentation Theories Relate to Aristotle? The Case of Pragma-Dialectics. Argumentation 27 (1):49-70.
Frans H. Eemeren (2012). The Pragma-Dialectical Theory Under Discussion. Argumentation 26 (4):439-457.
Floris Bex & Bart Verheij (2012). Solving a Murder Case by Asking Critical Questions: An Approach to Fact-Finding in Terms of Argumentation and Story Schemes. Argumentation 26 (3):325-353.
J. Anthony Blair (2001). Walton's Argumentation Schemes for Presumptive Reasoning: A Critique and Development. Argumentation 15 (4):365-379.
Scott Jacobs (2000). Rhetoric and Dialectic From the Standpoint of Normative Pragmatics. Argumentation 14 (3):261-286.
Erik C. W. Krabbe (2013). Topical Roots of Formal Dialectic. Argumentation 27 (1):71-87.
Michael Leff (2000). Rhetoric and Dialectic in the Twenty-First Century. Argumentation 14 (3):241-254.
Nancy Green (2010). Representation of Argumentation in Text with Rhetorical Structure Theory. Argumentation 24 (2):181-196.
Douglas N. Walton (2007). Media Argumentation: Dialectic, Persuasion, and Rhetoric. Cambridge University Press.
Douglas Walton (2012). Building a System for Finding Objections to an Argument. Argumentation 26 (3):369-391.
Douglas N. Walton (1996). Argumentation Schemes for Presumptive Reasoning. L. Erlbaum Associates.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2010-09-13Total downloads3 ( #202,107 of 549,699 )Recent downloads (6 months)0How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
