Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Sampling Scholarly Arguments: A Test of a Theory of Good Inference.David Hitchcock - unknown
  • An Automated System for Argument Invention in Law Using Argumentation and Heuristic Search Procedures.Douglas Walton - 2005 - Ratio Juris 18 (4):434-463.
    . A heuristic search procedure for inventing legal arguments is built on two tools already widely in use in argumentation. Argumentation schemes are forms of argument representing premise‐conclusion and inference structures of common types of arguments. Schemes especially useful in law represent defeasible arguments, like argument from expert opinion. Argument diagramming is a visualization tool used to display a chain of connected arguments linked together. One such tool, Araucaria, available free at , helps a user display an argument on the (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • On Argumentation Schemes and the Natural Classification of Arguments.J. Katzav & C. A. Reed - 2004 - Argumentation 18 (2):239-259.
    We develop conceptions of arguments and of argument types that will, by serving as the basis for developing a natural classification of arguments, benefit work in artificial intelligence. Focusing only on arguments construed as the semantic entities that are the outcome of processes of reasoning, we outline and clarify our view that an argument is a proposition that represents a fact as both conveying some other fact and as doing so wholly. Further, we outline our view that, with respect to (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   12 citations  
  • A History of AI and Law in 50 Papers: 25 Years of the International Conference on AI and Law. [REVIEW]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 - 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)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   11 citations  
  • Begging the Question in Arguments Based on Testimony.Douglas Walton - 2005 - Argumentation 19 (1):85-113.
    This paper studies some classic cases of the fallacy of begging the question based on appeals to testimony containing circular reasoning. For example, suppose agents a, b and c vouch for d’s credentials, and agents b, d, and e vouch for a’s credentials. Such a sequence of reasoning is circular because a is offering testimony for d but d is offering testimony for a. The paper formulates and evaluates restrictions on the use of testimonial evidence that might be used to (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  • A Carneades Reconstruction of Popov V Hayashi.Thomas F. Gordon & Douglas Walton - 2012 - 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)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • Profiles of Dialogue for Amphiboly.Douglas Walton - 2020 - Informal Logic 40 (1):3-45.
    Amphiboly has been widely recognized, starting from the time of Aristotle, as an informal fallacy arising from grammatical ambiguity. This paper applies the profiles of dialogue tool to the fallacy of amphiboly, providing a five-step evidence-based procedure whereby a syntactically ambiguous sentence uttered in a natural language text can be evaluated as committing a fallacy of amphiboly. A user applies the tool to a natural language text by comparing a descriptive graph, representing how the argumentation actually went, to a normative (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • How to Reconstruct a Thought Experiment.Marek Picha - 2011 - Organon F: Medzinárodný Časopis Pre Analytickú Filozofiu 18 (2):154-188.
    The paper is a contribution to the debate on the epistemological status of thought experiments. I deal with the epistemological uniqueness of experiments in the sense of their irreducibility to other sources of justification. In particular, I criticize an influential argument for the irreducibility of thought experiments to general arguments. First, I introduce the radical empiricist theory of eliminativism, which considers thought experiments to be rhetorically modified arguments, uninteresting from the epistemological point of view. Second, I present objections to the (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Formalna ocena argumentacji.Marcin Selinger - 2012 - Przeglad Filozoficzny - Nowa Seria 81 (1):89-109.
    Naszym celem jest dostarczenie formalnego modelu oceny możliwie szerokiej klasy argumentacji, w szczególności tych, które pojawiają się w kontekstach naturalnych. We wprowadzeniu przedstawiamy elementarne sposoby rozbudowywania argumentacji prostych w coraz bardziej złożone struktury. W drugim rozdziale podajemy ścisłe definicje pojęć służących do opisu tych struktur — argumentację definiujemy jako niepusty i skończony zbiór sekwentów, tj. jako niepustą i skończoną relację zachodzącą pomiędzy niepustymi i skończonymi zbio-rami zdań a pojedynczymi zdaniami danego języka; wprowadzamy także kilka pojęć (nie-spójność, rozbieżność, kolistość), które pozwalają (...)
    Direct download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • The Informal Use of Reductio Ad Absurdum.Henrike Jansen - unknown
  • Resolving Moral Dissensus: Possibilities for Argumentation.James B. Freeman - unknown
    Moral dissensus may arise first because persons may disagree over the warrants licensing inferring an evaluative conclusion from premises asserting that properties alleged evaluatively relevant hold. This results in seeing different properties as evaluatively relevant. Secondly, such properties will frequently not be descriptive but interpretive, asserting some nomic connection. Persons may disagree over what evaluatively relevant properties hold in a given case. We explore the possibilities for argumentation to resolve these two types of disagreement.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Deep Disagreements: A Meta-Argumentation Approach.Maurice Finocchiaro & David M. Godden - unknown
    This paper examines the views of Fogelin, Woods, Johnstone, etc., concerning deep disa-greements, force-five standoffs, philosophical controversies, etc. My approach is to reconstruct their views and critiques of them as meta-arguments, and to elaborate the meta-argumentative aspects of radical disa-greements. It turns out that deep disagreements are resolvable to a greater degree than usually thought, but only by using special principles and practices, such as meta-argumentation, ad hominem argumentation, Ramsey’s principle, etc.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  • Informal Logic and its Implications for Philosophy.Nicolas Maudet & Alec Fisher - 2000 - Informal Logic 20 (2).
    I take 'informal logic' to be the (descriptive and normative) study of 'real arguments'-arguments which are or have been used with the aim of convincing others of a point of view. I argue that the informal logic tradition thus conceived (i) lends strong support to something like Quine's view that our beliefs really support one another like the filaments in a spider's web--and thus that the traditional view that implication is an asymmetric relation is false; (ii) suggests that the classic (...)
    Direct download (11 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Henry Johnstone, Jr.'S Still-Unacknowledged Contributions to Contemporary Argumentation Theory.Jean Goodwin - 2001 - Informal Logic 21 (1).
    Given the pragmatic tum recently taken by argumentation studies, we owe renewed attention to Henry Johnstone's views on the primacy of process over product. In particular, Johnstone's decidedly non-cooperative model is a refreshing alternative to the current dialogic theories of arguing, one which opens the way for specifically rhetorical lines of inquiry.
    Direct download (11 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Refuting a Standpoint by Appealing to Its Outcomes: Reductio Ad Absurdum Vs. Argument From Consequences.Henrike Jansen - 2007 - Informal Logic 27 (3):249-266.
    Used informally, the Reductio ad Absurdum (RAA) consists in reasoning appealing to the logically implied, absurd consequences of a hypothetical proposition, in order to refute it. This kind of reasoning resembles the Argument from Consequences, which appeals to causally induced consequences. These types of argument are sometimes confused, since it is not worked out how these different kinds of consequences should be distinguished. In this article it is argued that the logical consequences in RAA-argumentation can take different appearances and that (...)
    Direct download (10 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • How Philosophical is Informal Logic?John Woods - 2000 - Informal Logic 20 (2).
    Consider the proposition, "Informal logic is a subdiscipline of philosophy". The best chance of showing this to be true is showing that informal logic is part of logic, which in turn is a part of philosophy. Part 1 is given over to the task of sorting out these connections. If successful, informal logic can indeed be seen as part of philosophy; but there is no question of an exclusive relationship. Part 2 is a critical appraisal of the suggestion that informal (...)
    Direct download (10 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   14 citations  
  • Informal Logic: An Overview.J. Anthony Blair & Ralph H. Johnson - 2000 - Informal Logic 20 (2).
    In this overview article, we first explain what we take informal logic to be, discussing misconceptions and distinguishing our conception of it from competing ones; second, we briefly catalogue recent informal logic research, under 14 headings; third, we suggest four broad areas of problems and questions for future research; fourth, we describe current scholarly resources for informal logic; fifth, we discuss three implications of informal logic for philosophy in particular, and take note ofpractical consequences of a more general sort.
    Direct download (11 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   15 citations  
  • Analyzing Conversational Reasoning.Merrilee H. Salmon & Colleen M. Zeitz - 1995 - Informal Logic 17 (1).
    This work discusses an empirical study of reasoning as it occurs in conversations. Reasoning in this context has features not usually accounted for in standard methods for describing argumentation (e.g., Toulmin, (1964), Toulmin, Rieke, and Janik (1984)). For example, insufficient attention has been paid to challenges which can be used to shift the ground of an argument and to the development of multiple conversational grounds. Moreover, even though the value of cooperative efforts in building arguments is widely recognized, more needs (...)
    Direct download (11 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Wigmore's Chart Method.Jean Goodwin & Alec Fisher - 2000 - Informal Logic 20 (3).
    A generation before Beardsley, legal scholar John Henry Wigmore invented a scheme for representing arguments in a tree diagram, aimed to help advocates analyze the proof of facts at trial. In this essay, I describe Wigmore's "Chart Method" and trace its origin and influence. Wigmore, I argue, contributes to contemporary theory in two ways. His rhetorical approach to diagramming provides a novel perspective on problems about the theory of reasoning, premise adequacy, and dialectical obligations. Further, he advances a novel solution (...)
    Direct download (12 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Dialectics, Evaluation, and Argument.Maurice A. Finocchiaro - 2003 - Informal Logic 23 (1).
    A critical examination of the dialectical approach, focusing on a comparison ofthe illative and the dialectical definitions of argument. I distinguish a moderate, a strong and a hyper dialectical conception of argument. I critique Goldman's argument for the moderate conception and Johnson's argument for the strong conception, and argue that the moderate conception is correct.
    Direct download (13 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   10 citations  
  • Meta-Argumentation in Hume’s Critique of the Design Argument.Maurice A. Finocchiaro - unknown
    Although Hume’s critique of the design argument is a powerful non-inductive meta-argument, the main line of critical reasoning is not analogical but rather a complex meta-argument. It consists of two parts, one interpretive, the other evaluative. The critical meta-argument advances twelve criticisms: that the design argument is weak because two of its three premises are justified by inadequate subarguments; because its main inference embodies four flaws; and because the conclusion is in itself problematic for four reasons. Such complexity is quite (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Macro-Toulmin: The Argument Model as Structural Guideline in Academic Writing.Signe Hegelund & Christian Kock - unknown
    Attempts to use Toulmin's argument model in teaching argument have had mixed success. We suggest using it specifically to teach academic writing. Moreover, we think it should be used to teach what major constituents are characteristic of academic wri ting, rather than how to make each individual point. For example, one important feature of academic writing is that the writer should carefully discuss the warrant for the data she uses, whereas debaters in practical argument are rarely required to do so. (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Making Sense of “Informal Logic”.Ralph H. Johnson - 2006 - Informal Logic 26 (3):231-258.
    This paper is an exercise in intellectual history, an attempt to understand how a specific term—”informal logic”— came to be interpreted in so many different ways. I trace the emergence and development of “informal logic” to help explain the many different meanings, how they emerged and how they are related. This paper is also, to some degree, an account of a movement that developed outside the mainstream of philosophy, whose origins lie in a desire to make logic useful (echoing Dewey).
    Direct download (11 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   11 citations  
  • Argument Strength, the Toulmin Model, and Ampliative Probability.James B. Freeman - 2006 - Informal Logic 26 (1):25-40.
    We argue that Cohen’s concept of inductive or ampliative probability facilitates proper explication of sufficient strength for non-demonstrative arguments conforming to the Toulmin model. The data and claims of such arguments are singular statements. We may epistemically classify the warrants of such arguments as empirical (either physical or personal), institutional, or evaluative. Backing evidence and rebutting considerations vary with the epistemic type of warrant, but in each case the notion of ampliative probability for arguments with warrants of that type can (...)
    Direct download (11 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • Applying Soundness Standards to Qualified Reasoning.Robert H. Ennis - 2004 - Informal Logic 24 (1):23-39.
    Defining qualified reasoning as reasoning containing such loose qualifying words as 'probably,' 'usually,' 'probable, 'likely,' 'ceteris paribus,' and 'primafacie, Ennis argues that typical cases of qualified reasoning, though they might be good arguments, are deductively invalid, implying that such arguments fail soundness standards. He considers and rejects several possible alternative ways of viewing such cases, ending with a proposal for applying qualified soundness standards, which requires employment of sufficient background knowledge, sensitivity, experience and understanding of the situation. All of this (...)
    Direct download (11 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • Dialectical Relevance in Persuasion Dialogue.Douglas Walton - 1999 - Informal Logic 19 (2).
    How to model relevance in argumentation is an important problem for informal logic. Dialectical relcvance is determined by the use of an argument for some purpose in different types of dialogue, according to the ncw dialectic. A central type of dialogue is persuasion dialogue in which one participant uses rational argumentation to try to get the other participant to accept a designated proposition. In this paper, a method for judging relevance in persuasion dialogue is presented. The method is based on (...)
    Direct download (11 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Solving a Murder Case by Asking Critical Questions: An Approach to Fact-Finding in Terms of Argumentation and Story Schemes. [REVIEW]Floris Bex & Bart Verheij - 2012 - Argumentation 26 (3):325-353.
    In this paper, we look at reasoning with evidence and facts in criminal cases. We show how this reasoning may be analysed in a dialectical way by means of critical questions that point to typical sources of doubt. We discuss critical questions about the evidential arguments adduced, about the narrative accounts of the facts considered, and about the way in which the arguments and narratives are connected in an analysis. Our treatment shows how two different types of knowledge, represented as (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  • Three Recalcitrant Problems of Argument Identification.Michael E. Malone - 2003 - Informal Logic 23 (3):237-261.
    Logicians disagree on (1) criteria for the presence of an argument, (2) criteria for adding implicit premises and (3) criteria for linking premises. I attempt to resolve all three problems, and in the process to remove the main obstacles to teaching diagramming. The first problem is resolved by working with real discourse that students find on their own, rather than the artificial examples and problems found in logic texts; it is further reduced by examining the different uses of argument and (...)
    Direct download (11 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Argument Has No Function.Jean Goodwin - 2007 - Informal Logic 27 (1):69-90.
    Douglas Walton has been right in calling us to attend to the pragmatics of argument. He has, however, also insisted that arguments should be understood and assessed by considering the functions they perform; and from this, I dissent. Argument has no determinable function in the sense Walton needs, and even if it did, that function would not ground norms for argumentative practice. As an alternative to a functional theory of argumentative pragmatics, I propose a design view, which draws attention to (...)
    Direct download (13 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   34 citations  
  • Argument Diagramming in Logic, Artificial Intelligence, and Law.Chris Reed, Douglas Walton & Fabrizio Macagno - 2007 - Artificial Intelligence, and Law 22 (1):87-109.
  • Mapping the Structure of Debate.Jeffrey Yoshimi - 2004 - Informal Logic 24 (1):1-22.
    Although debate is a richly structured and prevalent form of discourse, it has received little scholarly attention. Logicians have focused on the structure of individual arguments—how they divide into premises and conclusions, which in turn divide into various constituents. In contrast, I focus on the structure of sets of arguments, showing how arguments are themselves constituents in high-level dialectical structures. I represent debates and positions by graphs whose vertices correspond to arguments and whose edges correspond to two inter-argument relations: “dispute” (...)
    Direct download (12 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • Toulmin Diagrams in Theory & Practice: Theory Neutrality in Argument Representation.Chris Reed & Glenn Rowe - unknown
    The Toulmin diagram layout is very familiar and widely used, particularly in the teaching of critical thinking skills. The conventional box-and-arrow diagram is equally familiar and widespread. Translation between the two throws up a number of interesting challenges. Some of these challenges represent slightly different ways of looking at old and deep theoretical questions. Others are diagrammatic versions of questions that have already been addressed in artificial intelligence models of argument. But there are further questions that are posed as a (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Modality and its Conversational Backgrounds in the Reconstruction of Argumentation.Andrea Rocci - 2008 - Argumentation 22 (2):165-189.
    The paper considers the role of modality in the rational reconstruction of standpoints and arguments. The paper examines in what conditions modal markers can act as argumentative indicators and what kind of cues they provide for the reconstruction of argument. The paper critically re-examines Toulmin’s hypothesis that the meaning of the modals can be analyzed in terms of a field-invariant argumentative force and field-dependent criteria in the light of the Theory of Relative Modality developed within linguistic semantics, showing how this (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   10 citations  
  • The Carneades Model of Argument Invention.Douglas N. Walton & Thomas F. Gordon - 2012 - Pragmatics and Cognition 20 (1):1-31.
    Argument invention is a method that can be used to help an arguer find arguments that could be used to prove a claim he needs to defend. The aim of this paper is to show how argumentation systems recently developed in artificial intelligence can be applied to the task of argument invention. One such system called Carneades is featured. Carneades can be used to analyze arguments, evaluate arguments, to make an argument diagram, and to construct arguments from a database. Using (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  • Exemplifying an Internal Realist Model of Truth.Mark Weinstein - 2002 - Philosophica 69.
  • Using Toulmin's Framework for the Analysis of Everyday Argumentation: Some Methodological Considerations.Maria Simosi - 2003 - Argumentation 17 (2):185-202.
    This study used Toulmin's analytical framework of argumentative structure in order to examine employees' argumentative discourse on the way they handle conflict situations in their workplace. The way in which this analytical tool has been applied here challenges critics on the usefulness of the particular analytical tool for the analysis of real-life argumentation. The definition of argumentative elements according to their function in the context of a particular argument, together with the analysis beyond the level of what has been stated (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Discourse Relations: Genre-Specific Degrees of Overtness in Argumentative and Narrative Discourse.Carolin Hofmockel, Anita Fetzer & Robert M. Maier - 2017 - Argument and Computation 8 (2):131-151.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • “Dialectics and the Macrostructure of Argument” by James Freeman.Alec Fisher - 1992 - Informal Logic 14 (2):193-204.
  • Evidential Reasoning.Marcello Di Bello & Bart Verheij - 2018 - In G. Bongiovanni, G. Postema, A. Rotolo, G. Sartor, C. Valentini & D. Walton (eds.), Handbook in Legal Reasoning and Argumentation. Cham, Switzerland: Springer. pp. 447-493.
    The primary aim of this chapter is to explain the nature of evidential reasoning, the characteristic difficulties encountered, and the tools to address these difficulties. Our focus is on evidential reasoning in criminal cases. There is an extensive scholarly literature on these topics, and it is a secondary aim of the chapter to provide readers the means to find their way in historical and ongoing debates.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Commentary on Johnson.Erik C. W. Krabe - unknown
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Commentary on Ruhl.Eveline T. Feteris - unknown
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Fallacies and the Preconditions of Argumentation.Chris Campolo - unknown
    If we think of fallacies as violations of the preconditions governing the products, processes, and procedures of argumentation, we see that fallacies do not merely weaken arguments, but rather undermine the possibility of argument itself. This approac h recommends itself on several counts. First, it accounts for diversity in fallacy analysis. Second, it makes possible investigations into new kinds of fallacies. Third, it provides new applications for ongoing developments in fallacy theory.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Commentary on Blair.Maurice Finocchiaro - unknown
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Mill’s On Liberty and Argumentation Theory.Maurice A. Finocchiaro - unknown
    Chapter 2 of Mill’s On Liberty is reconstructed as a complex argument for freedom of discussion; it consists of three subarguments, each possessing illative and dialectical components. The illative component is this: freedom of discussion is desirable because it enables us to determine whether an opinion is true, whereas its denial amounts to an assumption of infallibility; it improves our understanding and appreciation of the supporting reasons of true opinions, and our understanding and appreciation of their practical or emotional meaning; (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Commentary on Benjafield, James & Saroka.Robert C. Pinto - unknown
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • The Voice of the Other: A Dialogico-Rhetorical Understanding of Opponent and Toulmin’s Rebuttal.Wouter H. Slob - unknown
    Although contemporary dialectical logic recognizes an important role for the opponent in argumentation, it remains loyal to the idea that arguments are supportive. In this paper, it is argued that because of this dialectical logic does not take seriously its own dialogical perspective. Without acknowledging a substantial role for rebutting factors in argumentation, the role of the opponent remains secondary. Toulmin’s understanding of the rebuttal suggests a way to incorporate such a substantial role of the opponent.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Schemes of Inference, Conflict, and Preference in a Computational Model of Argument.Floris Bex & Chris Reed - 2011 - Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric 23 (36).
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • J. Anthony Blair (2012): Groundwork in the Theory of Argumentation. [REVIEW]James B. Freeman - 2012 - Argumentation 26 (4):505-527.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • The Ways of Criticism.Erik C. W. Krabbe & Jan Albert van Laar - 2011 - Argumentation 25 (2):199-227.
    This paper attempts to systematically characterize critical reactions in argumentative discourse, such as objections, critical questions, rebuttals, refutations, counterarguments, and fallacy charges, in order to contribute to the dialogical approach to argumentation. We shall make use of four parameters to characterize distinct types of critical reaction. First, a critical reaction has a focus, for example on the standpoint, or on another part of an argument. Second, critical reactions appeal to some kind of norm, argumentative or other. Third, they each have (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   20 citations  
  • Epistemic and Dialectical Models of Begging the Question.Douglas Walton - 2006 - Synthese 152 (2):237-284.
    This paper addresses the problem posed by the current split between the two opposed hypotheses in the growing literature on the fallacy of begging the question the epistemic hypothesis, based on knowledge and belief, and the dialectical one, based on formal dialogue systems. In the first section, the nature of split is explained, and it is shown how each hypothesis has developed. To get the beginning reader up to speed in the literature, a number of key problematic examples are analyzed (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   11 citations