A Network of Argumentation Schemes and Critical Questions
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22329/il.v42i4.6877Abstract
In this paper, we devise a network that consists of argumentation schemes and critical questions that participants in debates can use to easily construct arguments that attack or support former arguments. As a prototype, we build a potential network of argumentation schemes and critical questions with a practical reasoning scheme at its center. The usefulness of a NASCQ in constructing and reconstructing complex arguments and in formal argumentation is also explored along with argumentation more broadly.
References
Atkinson, K. and T. Bench-Capon. 2007. Practical reasoning as presumptive argumentation using action-based alternating transition systems. Artificial Intelligence 171(10-15): 855-874.
Atkinson, K. and T. Bench-Capon. 2008a. Addressing moral problems through practical reasoning. Journal of Applied Logic 6: 135–151.
Atkinson, K. and T. Bench-Capon. 2008b. Abstract argumentation scheme frameworks. In AIMSA 2008, LNAI 5253, eds. D. Dochev, M. Pistore and P. Traverso, 220-234. Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag.
Atkinson, K. and T. Bench-Capon. 2021. Argumentation schemes in AI and law. Argument & Computation 12: 417-434.
Atkinson, K., T. Bench-Capon and S. Modgil. 2008. Argumentation for decision support. In DEXA 2006, LNCS 4080, eds. S. Bressan, J. Küng and R. Wagner, 822-831. Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag.
Bex, F., H. Prakken, C. Reed, D. Walton. 2003. Towards a formal account of reasoning with evidence: Argumentation schemes and generalizations, Artificial Intelligence and Law 11(2-3): 125-165.
Cayrol, C. and M. Lagasquie-Schiex. 2013. Bipolarity in argumentation graphs: Towards a better understanding. International Journal of Approximate Reasoning 54(7): 876-899.
Cohen, A., S. Gottifredi, A. J. García, G. R. Simari. 2014. A survey of different approaches to support in argumentation systems. The Knowledge Engineering Review 29: 513-550.
Dung, P. M. 1995. On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming, and n-person games. Artificial Intelligence 77(2): 321-357.
Eemeren, F. H. van and R. Grootendorst. 2004. A systematic theory of argumentation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Eemeren, F. H. van and B. Garrsen. 2014. Argumentation by analogy in stereotypical argumentative patterns. In Systematic approaches to argument by analogy, eds. H. J. Ribeiro, 41-56. Heidelberg/New York/Dortrecht/London: Springer.
Eemeren, F. H. van, B. Garssen, E. C. W. Krabbe, A. F. S. Henkemans, B. Verheij and J. H. M. Wagemans. 2014. Handbook of argumentation theory. Dordrecht/Heidelberg: Springer Reference.
Fahnestock, J. and M. Secor. 1982. A Rhetoric of argument (2nd ed). Boston: McGraw Hill Publisher.
Freeman, J. B. 1991. Dialectics and the macrostructure of arguments. A theory of argument structure. Berlin/New York: Foris.
Freeman, J. B. 1995. The appeal to popularity and presumption by common knowledge. In Fallacies: Classical and contemporary readings, eds. H. V. Hansen and R.C. Pinto, 263-273. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.
Freeman, J. B. 2011. Argument structure. Representation and theory. Dordrecht/New York: Springer.
Gijzel, B. van and H. Prakken. 2012. Relating Carneades with abstract argumentation via the ASPIC+ framework for structured argumen-tation. Argument and Computation 3(1): 21-47.
Godden, D. M. and D. Walton. 2007. Advances in the theory of argumentation schemes and critical questions. Informal Logic 27(3): 267-292.
Gordon, T. F., H. Prakken and D. Walton. 2007. The Carneades model of argument and burden of proof. Artificial Intelligence 171: 875-896.
Green, N. L. 2017. Argumentation scheme-based argument generation to support feedback in educational argument modeling systems. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence Education 27: 515-533.
Grennan, W. S. 1997. Informal logic. London: McGill-Queen’s University Press.
Hansen, H. V. and D. H. Cohen. 2011. Are there methods of informal logic? In Argumentation: Cognition and community. Proceedings of the 9th international conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation (OSSA), ed. F. Zenker, 1-13. Windsor, ON: OSSA.
Hastings, A. 1963. A reformulation of the modes of reasoning in argumentation. Ph.D. dissertation. Evanston, Illinois: Northwestern University.
Henkemans, S. A. F. 1992. Analysing complex argumentation. The reconstruction of multiple and coordinatively compound argumentation in a critical discussion. Amsterdam: Sic Sat.
Hitchcock, David. 2017. Informal logic and the concept of argument. In On reasoning and argument. Essays in informal logic and on critical thinking. Argumentation library 30, ed. F. H. van Eemeren, 447-476. Springer International Publishing AG.
Jovicic, T. 2002. Authority-based argumentative strategies. Doctoral dissertation in the department of theoretical philosophy. Uppsala, Sweden: Uppsala University.
Juthe, A. 2005. Argument by analogy. Argumentation 19: 1-27.
Kienpointner, M. 1992. How to classify arguments. In Argumentation illuminated, eds. F. H. van Eemeren, R. Grootendorst, J. A. Blair and C. A. Willard, 178-188. Dordrecht: Foris.
Lumer, C. 2016. Walton’s argumentation schemes. In Argumentation, objectivity, and bias: Proceedings of the 11th international conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation (OSSA), eds. P. Bondy and L. Benacquista, 1-20. Windsor, ON: OSSA.
Macagno, F. 2015. A means-end classification of argumentation schemes. In Reflections on theoretical issues in argumentation theory. Argumentation library 28, eds. F. H. van Eemeren and B. Gars-sen, 183-201. Springer. DOI:10.1007/978-3-319-21103-9_14
Macagno, F. 2021. Argumentation schemes in AI: A literature review. Introduction to the special issue. Argument & Computation 12: 287-302.
Macagno, F. and D. Walton. 2015. Classifying the patterns of natural arguments. Philosophy and Rhetoric 48(1): 26-53.
Moens, M.-F. 2018. Argumentation mining: How can a machine acquire common sense and world knowledge? Argument & Computation 9: 1-14.
Orsinger, R. 2011. The role of reasoning in constructing a persuasive argument. San Antonio: San Antonio Office.
Panisson, A. R., A. Ali, P. McBurney and R. H. Bordini. 2018. Argumentation schemes for data access control. In Computational Models of Argument (COMMA), 361-368.
Panisson, A. R., P. McBurney and R. H. B. Bordini. 2021. A computational model of argumentation schemes for multi-agent systems. Argument & Computation 12: 357-395.
Perelman, C. and L. Olbrechts-Tyteca. 1969. The new rhetoric. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.
Pinto, R. C. 2003. Commentary on C. Reed and D. Walton ‘Argumentation schemes in argument-as-process and argument-as-product. In Informal Logic at 25: Proceedings of the Windsor Conference, eds. J. A. Blair, D. Farr, H. V. Hansen, R. H. Johnson and C. W. Tindale. Windsor, ON: OSSA.
Polberg, S. and A. Hunter. 2018. Empirical evaluation of abstract argumentation: Supporting the need for bipolar and probabilistic approaches. International Journal of Approximate Reasoning 93: 487–543.
Prakken, H. 2010. An abstract framework for argumentation with structured arguments. Argument and Computation 1(2): 93-124.
Qassas, M. A., D. Fogli, M. Giacomin and G. Guida. 2015. Analysis of clinical discussions based on argumentation schemes. Procedia Computer Science 64: 282-289.
Rahwan, I., B. Banihashemi, C. Reed, D. Walton and S. Abdallah. 2011. Representing and classifying arguments on the semantic web. The Knowledge Engineering Review 26(04): 487-511.
Reed, C. and G. Rowe. 2004. Araucaria: software for argument analysis, diagramming and representation. International Journal of AI Tools 13(4): 961-980.
Shi, C., S. Smets, and F. R. Velázquez-Quesada. 2018. Beliefs supported by binary arguments. Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logics 28(2-3): 165-188.
Verheij, B. 2003. Dialectical argumentation with argumentation schemes: An approach to legal logic. Artificial Intelligence and Law 11(2-3): 167-195.
Walton, D. 1996. Argumentation schemes for presumptive reasoning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Walton, D. 1997. Appeal to expert opinion. University Park: Penn State University Press.
Walton, D. 2005. Argumentation methods for artificial intelligence in law. Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer.
Walton, D. 2006. Fundamentals of critical argumentation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Walton, D. 2008a. Informal logic. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Walton, D. 2008b. Proleptic argumentation. Argumentation & Advocacy 44: 143-154.
Walton, D. 2010. Similarity, precedent and argument from analogy. Artificial Intelligence and Law 18(3): 217-246.
Walton, D. 2013a. Methods of argumentation. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Walton, D. 2013b. On a razor’s edge: evaluating arguments from expert opinion. Argument & Computation 5(2-3): 139-159.
Walton, D and F. Macagno. 2015. A classification system for argumentation schemes. Argument & Computation 6(3): 219-245.
Walton, D., C. Reed and F. Macagno. 2008. Argumentation schemes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Walton, D. and M. Koszowy. 2016. Arguments from authority and expert opinion in computational argumentation systems. AI and society 32(4): 483-496.
Weide, T. L. van der, F. Dignum, J. Ch. Meyer, H. Prakken and G. A. W. Vreeswijk. 2006. Personality-based practical reasoning. In ArgMas 2008, LNAI 5384, eds. I. Rahwan and P. Moraitis, 3-18. Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag.
Walton, D. and L. M. Batten. 1984. Games, graphs and circular arguments. Logique et Analyse 27(106): 133-164.
Weitzenfeld, J. 1984. Valid reasoning from analogy. Philosophy of Science 51(1): 137-149.
Wells, S. 2014. Supporting argumentation schemes in argumentative dialogue games. Studies in Logic, Rhetoric and Grammar 36(49): 171-191.
