PhilPapers is currently in read-only mode while we are performing some maintenance. You can use the site normally except that you cannot sign in. This shouldn't last long.
248 found
Sort by:
See also:
Profile: Douglas Walton (University of Windsor)
  1. Douglas Walton, Dialogical Models of Explanation.
    Explanation-Aware Computing: Papers from the 2007 AAAI Workshop, Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence, Technical Report WS-07-06, Menlo Park California, AAAI Press, 2007, 1-9.
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Douglas Walton, Examination Dialogue: An Argumentation Framework for Critically Questioning an Expert Opinion.
    No categories
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Douglas Walton, The Carneades Model of Argument and Burden of Proof.
    with Thomas F. Gordon and Henry Prakken. Artificial Intelligence, forthcoming. [Preprint posted.].
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Douglas Walton, The Three Bases for the Enthymeme: A Dialogical Theory.
    Journal of Applied Logic, to appear [uncorrected version posted].
    No categories
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Douglas Walton, Visualization Tools, Argumentation Schemes and Expert Opinion Evidence in Law.
    No categories
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Douglas Walton & David M. Godden, Alternatives to Suspicion and Trust as Conditions for Challenge in Argumentative Dialogues.
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Douglas Walton & Fabrizio Macagno, Argumentative Reasoning Patterns.
    Proceedings of 6th CMNA (Computational Models of Natural Argument)Workshop, ECAI (European Conference on Artificial Intelligence), Rivadel Garda, Italy, August 28 - September 1, Trento, Italy, University of Trento, 2006, 48-51.
    No categories
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Douglas Walton & Fabrizio Macagno, Common Knowledge in Argumentation.
    Studies in Communication Sciences, 6, 2006, 3-26 . [link to online version posted].
    No categories
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Douglas Walton & Burkhard Schafer, Arthur, George and the Mystery of the Missingmotive: Towards a Theory of Evidentiary Reasoning About Motives.
    International Commentary on Evidence, 2006 Vol. 4, Issue 2, 1-47 . [link to online version posted].
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. Fabrizio Macagno, Chris Reed & Douglas Walton (forthcoming). Argument Diagramming in Logic, Artificial Intelligence, and Law. Artificial Intelligence, and Law.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. Douglas Walton (forthcoming). Baseballs and Arguments From Fairness. Artificial Intelligence and Law.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. Douglas Walton (forthcoming). Control. Behaviorism.
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. Douglas Walton (forthcoming). On a Razor's Edge: Evaluating Arguments From Expert Opinion. Argument and Computation.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. Douglas N. Walton (forthcoming). Pe'titio Principii and Argument Analysis. Informal Logic: The First International Symposium.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. Douglas Walton, Christopher W. Tindale & Thomas F. Gordon (2014). Applying Recent Argumentation Methods to Some Ancient Examples of Plausible Reasoning. Argumentation 28 (1):85-119.
    Plausible (eikotic) reasoning known from ancient Greek (late Academic) skeptical philosophy is shown to be a clear notion that can be analyzed by argumentation methods, and that is important for argumentation studies. It is shown how there is a continuous thread running from the Sophists to the skeptical philosopher Carneades, through remarks of Locke and Bentham on the subject, to recent research in artificial intelligence. Eleven characteristics of plausible reasoning are specified by analyzing key examples of it recognized as important (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  16. Katie Atkinson, Trevor Bench-Capon & Douglas Walton (2013). Distinctive Features of Persuasion and Deliberation Dialogues. 4 (2):105-127.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  17. Hans V. Hansen & Douglas N. Walton (2013). Argument Kinds and Argument Roles in the Ontario Provincial Election, 2011. Journal of Argumentation in Context 2 (2):226-258.
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  18. Douglas Walton (2013). Analogical Arguments. In Hugh LaFollette (ed.), The International Encyclopedia of Ethics. Wiley-Blackwell.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  19. Douglas Walton (2013). An Argumentation Model of Forensic Evidence in Fine Art Attribution. AI and Society 28 (4):509-530.
    In this paper, a case study is conducted to test the capability of the Carneades Argumentation System to model the argumentation in a case where forensic evidence was collected in an investigation triggered by a conflict among art experts on the attribution of a painting to Leonardo da Vinci. A claim that a portrait of a young woman in a Renaissance dress could be attributed to da Vinci was initially dismissed by art experts. Forensic investigations were carried out, and evidence (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  20. Douglas Walton (2013). Argument From Analogy in Legal Rhetoric. Artificial Intelligence and Law 21 (3):279-302.
    This paper applies recent work on scripts and stories developed as tools of evidential reasoning in artificial intelligence to model the use of argument from analogy as a rhetorical device of persuasion. The example studied is Gerry Spence’s closing argument in the case of Silkwood v. Kerr-McGee Corporation, said to be the most persuasive closing argument ever used in an American trial. It is shown using this example how argument from analogy is based on a similarity premise where similarity between (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  21. Douglas Walton (2013). Principles of Interpersonal Agency in the Free Will Defense. Bijdragen 37 (1):36-46.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  22. Douglas Walton & Giovanni Sartor (2013). Teleological Justification of Argumentation Schemes. Argumentation 27 (2):111-142.
    Argumentation schemes are forms of reasoning that are fallible but correctable within a self-correcting framework. Their use provides a basis for taking rational action or for reasonably accepting a conclusion as a tentative hypothesis, but they are not deductively valid. We argue that teleological reasoning can provide the basis for justifying the use of argument schemes both in monological and dialogical reasoning. We consider how such a teleological justification, besides being inspired by the aim of directing a bounded cognizer to (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  23. Douglas Walton & Nanning Zhang (2013). The Epistemology of Scientific Evidence. Artificial Intelligence and Law 21 (2):173-219.
    In place of the traditional epistemological view of knowledge as justified true belief we argue that artificial intelligence and law needs an evidence-based epistemology according to which scientific knowledge is based on critical analysis of evidence using argumentation. This new epistemology of scientific evidence (ESE) models scientific knowledge as achieved through a process of marshaling evidence in a scientific inquiry that results in a convergence of scientific theories and research results. We show how a dialogue interface of argument from expert (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  24. Trevor Bench-Capon, Michał Araszkiewicz, Kevin Ashley, Katie Atkinson, Floris Bex, Filipe Borges, Daniele Bourcier, Paul Bourgine, Jack G. Conrad, Enrico Francesconi, Thomas F. Gordon, Guido Governatori, Jochen L. Leidner, David D. Lewis, Ronald P. Loui, L. Thorne McCarty, Henry Prakken, Frank Schilder, Erich Schweighofer, Paul Thompson, Alex Tyrrell, Bart Verheij, Douglas N. Walton & Adam Z. Wyner (2012). A History of AI and Law in 50 Papers: 25 Years of the International Conference on AI and Law. [REVIEW] Artificial Intelligence and Law 20 (3):215-319.
    We provide a retrospective of 25 years of the International Conference on AI and Law, which was first held in 1987. Fifty papers have been selected from the thirteen conferences and each of them is described in a short subsection individually written by one of the 24 authors. These subsections attempt to place the paper discussed in the context of the development of AI and Law, while often offering some personal reactions and reflections. As a whole, the subsections build into (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  25. Thomas F. Gordon & Douglas Walton (2012). A Carneades Reconstruction of Popov V Hayashi. Artificial Intelligence and Law 20 (1):37-56.
    Carneades is an open source argument mapping application and a programming library for building argumentation support tools. In this paper, Carneades’ support for argument reconstruction, evaluation and visualization is illustrated by modeling most of the factual and legal arguments in Popov v Hayashi.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  26. Fabrizio Macagno & Douglas Walton (2012). Presumptions in Legal Argumentation. Ratio Juris 25 (3):271-300.
    In this paper a theoretical definition that helps to explain how the logical structure of legal presumptions is constructed by applying the Carneades model of argumentation developed in artificial intelligence. Using this model, it is shown how presumptions work as devices used in evidentiary reasoning in law in the event of a lack of evidence to assist a chain of reasoning to move forward to prove or disprove a claim. It is shown how presumptions work as practical devices that may (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  27. Douglas Walton (2012). Building a System for Finding Objections to an Argument. Argumentation 26 (3):369-391.
    Abstract This paper addresses the role that argumentation schemes and argument visualization software tools can play in helping to find and counter objections to a given argument one is confronted with. Based on extensive analysis of features of the argumentation in these two examples, a practical four-step method of finding objections to an argument is set out. The study also applies the Carneades Argumentation System to the task of finding objections to an argument, and shows how this system has some (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  28. Douglas Walton (2012). Computational Dialectic and Rhetorical Invention. AI and Society 26 (1):2011.
    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 (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  29. Douglas Walton (2012). Story Similarity in Arguments From Analogy. Informal Logic 32 (2):190-221.
    In this paper a hybrid model of argument from analogy is presented that combines argumentation schemes and story schemes. One premise of the argumentation scheme for argument from analogy in the model claims that one case is similar to another. Story schemes are abstract representations of stories (narratives, explanations) based on common knowledge about how sequences of actions and events we are familiar with can normally be expected to unfold. Story schemes are used (a) to model similarity between two cases, (...)
    Direct download (16 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  30. Douglas Walton & Thomas F. Gordon (2012). The Carneades Model of Argument Invention. Pragmatics and Cognition 20 (1):1-31.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  31. Fabrizio Macagno & Douglas Walton (2011). Reasoning From Paradigms and Negative Evidence. Pragmatics and Cognition 19 (1):92-116.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  32. Douglas Walton (2011). A Dialogue Model of Belief. Argument and Computation 1 (1):23-46.
    This paper offers a new model of belief by embedding the Peircean account of belief into a formal dialogue system that uses argumentation schemes for practical reasoning and abductive reasoning. A belief is characterised as a stable proposition that is derived abductively by one agent in a dialogue from the commitment set (including commitments derived from actions and goals) of another agent. On the model (to give a rough summary), a belief is defined as a proposition held by an agent (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  33. Douglas Walton (2011). A Dialogue System Specification for Explanation. Synthese 182 (3):349-374.
    This paper builds a dialectical system of explanation with speech act rules that define the kinds of moves allowed, like requesting and offering an explanation. Pre and post-condition rules for the speech acts determine when a particular speech act can be put forward as a move in the dialogue, and what type of move or moves must follow it. A successful explanation has been achieved when there has been a transfer of understanding from the party giving the explanation to the (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  34. Douglas Walton (2011). Burden of Proof in a Modified Hamblin Dialogue System. Informal Logic 31 (4):279-304.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  35. Douglas Walton (2011). Defeasible Reasoning and Informal Fallacies. Synthese 179 (3):377 - 407.
    This paper argues that some traditional fallacies should be considered as reasonable arguments when used as part of a properly conducted dialog. It is shown that argumentation schemes, formal dialog models, and profiles of dialog are useful tools for studying properties of defeasible reasoning and fallacies. It is explained how defeasible reasoning of the most common sort can deteriorate into fallacious argumentation in some instances. Conditions are formulated that can be used as normative tools to judge whether a given defeasible (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  36. Douglas Walton (2011). Erratum To: Computational Dialectic and Rhetorical Invention. [REVIEW] AI and Society 26 (1):19-19.
  37. Douglas Walton (2011). Reasoning About Knowledge Using Defeasible Logic. Argument and Computation 2 (2-3):131 - 155.
    In this paper, the Carneades argumentation system is extended to represent a procedural view of inquiry in which evidence is marshalled to support or defeat claims to knowledge. The model is a sequence of moves in a collaborative group inquiry in which parties take turns making assertions about what is known or not known, putting forward evidence to support them, and subjecting these moves to criticisms. It is shown how this model of evaluating evidence in an inquiry is based on (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  38. Douglas Walton (2011). Speech Act Rules for Burden of Proof in a Modified Hamblin Dialogue System. Informal Logic 31 (4):279-304.
    In his book on fallacies, Hamblin built a very simple system for argumentation in dialogue he called the Why Because System with Questions. In his discussion of this system, he replaced the concept of burden of proof with a simpler concept of initiative, which could be described as something like getting the upper hand as the argumentation moves back and forth in the dialogue between the one party and the other. No doubt he realized that the concept of burden of (...)
    Direct download (13 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  39. Douglas Walton (2011). The Structure of Argumentation in Health Product Messages. Argument and Computation 1 (3):179-198.
    This paper presents an analysis of argumentation in direct-to-consumer health product ads in Newsweek that brings out special features of the arguments used in the ads, including practical reasoning, chained arguments, enthymemes, and prolepsis. A way to help overcome deficiencies in techniques of tailored health communication in consumer health informatics is shown by using argumentation schemes, argument visualisation tools, and dialogue models to frame these persuasive communication messages. The evidence collected is shown to be useful to allow the health informatics (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  40. Douglas Walton & Ralph Johnson (2011). Introduction: Special Issue on Charles Hamblin. Informal Logic 31 (4).
    It is unfortunate that Hamblin’s contributions do not get him the credit he deserves for his remarkable achievements. Although his contributions to philosophy are well enough recognized, and his early contributions to computing have been acknowledged, it seems strange that his work has not been widely enough recognized for the interdisciplinary effect it has had. There has been a feedback loop whereby his theories on formal dialogue systems and imperatives were taken up in argumentation, applied in computing, and then used (...)
    Direct download (15 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  41. Douglas Walton & Fabrizio Macagno (2011). Quotations and Presumptions: Dialogical Effects of Misquotations. Informal Logic 31 (1).
    Manipulation of quotation, shown to be a common tactic of argumentation in this paper, is associated with fallacies like wrenching from context, hasty generalization, equivocation, accent, the straw man fallacy, and ad hominem arguments. Several examples are presented from everyday speech, legislative debates and trials. Analysis using dialog models explains the critical defects of argumentation illustrated in each of the examples. In the formal dialog system CB, a proponent and respondent take turns in making moves in an orderly goal-directed sequence (...)
    Direct download (14 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  42. Fabrizio Macagno & Douglas Walton (2010). Dichotomies and Oppositions in Legal Argumentation. Ratio Juris 23 (2):229-257.
    In this paper we use a series of examples to show how oppositions and dichotomies are fundamental in legal argumentation, and vitally important to be aware of, because of their twofold nature. On the one hand, they are argument structures underlying various kinds of rational argumentation commonly used in law as a means of getting to the truth in a conflict of opinion under critical discussion by two opposing sides before a tryer of fact. On the other hand, they are (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  43. Fabrizio Macagno & Douglas Walton (2010). Defeasible Classifications and Inferences From Definitions. Informal Logic 30 (1):34-61.
    We contend that it is possible to argue reasonably for and against arguments from classifications and definitions, provided they are seen as defeasible (subject to exceptions and critical questioning). Arguments from classification of the most common sorts are shown to be based on defeasible reasoning of various kinds represented by patterns of logical reasoning called defeasible argumentation schemes. We show how such schemes can be identified with heuristics, or short-cut solutions to a problem. We examine a variety of arguments of (...)
    Direct download (15 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  44. Fabrizio Macagno & Douglas Walton (2010). The Argumentative Uses of Emotive Language . Revista Iberoamericana de Argumentación 1:1-37.
  45. Douglas Walton (2010). Similarity, Precedent and Argument From Analogy. Artificial Intelligence and Law 18 (3):217-246.
    In this paper, it is shown (1) that there are two schemes for argument from analogy that seem to be competitors but are not, (2) how one of them is based on a distinctive type of similarity premise, (3) how to analyze the notion of similarity using story schemes illustrated by some cases, (4) how arguments from precedent are based on arguments from analogy, and in many instances arguments from classification, and (5) that when similarity is defined by means of (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  46. Douglas Walton (2010). Why Fallacies Appear to Be Better Arguments Than They Are. Informal Logic 30 (2):159-184.
    This paper offers a solution to the problem of understanding how a fallacious argument can be deceptive by “seeming to be valid”, or (better) appearing to be a better argument of its kind than it really is. The explanation of how fallacies are deceptive is based on heuristics and paraschemes. Heuristics are fast and frugal shortcuts to a solution to a problem that sometimes jump to a conclusion that is not justified. In fallacious instances, according to the theory proposed, this (...)
    Direct download (20 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  47. Douglas Walton & Fabrizio Macagno (2010). Wrenching From Context: The Manipulation of Commitments. [REVIEW] Argumentation 24 (3):283-317.
    This article analyses the fallacy of wrenching from context, using the dialectical notions of commitment and implicature as tools. The data, a set of key examples, is used to sharpen the conceptual borderlines around the related fallacies of straw man, accent, misquotation, and neglect of qualifications. According to the analysis, the main characteristics of wrenching from context are the manipulation of the meaning of the other’s statement through devices such as the use of misquotations, selective quotations, and quoting out of (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  48. Fabrizio Macagno & Douglas Walton (2009). Argument From Analogy in Law, the Classical Tradition, and Recent Theories. Philosophy and Rhetoric 42 (2):154-182.
    No categories
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  49. Fabrizio Macagno & Douglas Walton (2009). Enthymemes, Argumentation Schemes, and Topics. Logique Et Analyse 205:39-56.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  50. Douglas Walton (2009). Dialectical Shifts Underlying Arguments From Consequences. Informal Logic 29 (1):54-83.
    Eight structural criteria are developed as part of a dialogical method by testing them against seven examples of arguments from negative consequences. The aim is to provide a method for evaluating the arguments in the examples as fallacious or not. It is shown that any method that can be satisfactorily used to evaluate such examples needs to be based on two techniques. The first is careful application of argumentation underlying shifts from one type of dialog to another schemes. The second (...)
    Direct download (13 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
1 — 50 / 248