Abstract
In this paper some lessons are learned regarding how to extend and deepen the theory of Macagno (Assessing relevance. Lingua 210–211:42–64, 2018) on assessing dialectical relevance by using the notion of argument distance. An argument is defined as dialectically relevant if it is an appropriate move in a multiagent dialogue exchange. Three examples are studied where a criticism of relevance is made against an argument, and the problem posed is how a response to this type of criticism should be judged to be justified or not, based on the evidence. Based on these examples, an algorithm is presented that helps the user to determine argument distance in a given case as a means of helping to judge whether a criticism that an argument is not relevant is justified or not.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Anderson, A. R., & Belnap, N. (1975). Entailment: The logic of relevance and necessity. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Blakemore, D. (2002). Relevance and linguistic meaning: The semantics and pragmatics of discourse markers. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Carston, R. (2004). Relevance theory and the saying/implicating distinction. In L. Horn & G. Ward (Eds.), The handbook of pragmatics (pp. 633–656). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
Epstein, R. (1979). Relatedness and implication. Philosophical Studies, 36, 137–173.
Epstein, R. (1990). The semantic foundations of logic. Vol. 1, propositional logics. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer.
Erduran, S. (2008). Methodological foundation of the study of argumentation in science classroom. In S. Erduran & M. Pilar Jimenez-Aleixandre (Eds.), Argumentation in science education: Perspectives from classroom-based research (pp. 47–69). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.
Giora, R. (1985). Notes towards a theory of text coherence. Poetics Today, 6(4), 699–715. https://doi.org/10.2307/1771962.
Giora, R. (1997). Discourse coherence and theory of relevance: Stumbling blocks in search of a unified theory. Journal of Pragmatics, 27(1), 17–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(95)00065-8.
Gordon, T. (2010). An overview of the Carneades argumentation support system. In C. Reed & C. Tindale (Eds.), Dialectics, dialogue and argumentation. An examination of Douglas Walton’s theories of reasoning and argument (pp. 145–156). London, UK: College Publications.
Grice, P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole & J. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and semantics 3: Speech acts (pp. 41–58). New York, NY: Academic Press.
Hobbs, J. R. (1979). Coherence and coreference. Cognitive Science, 3, 67–90. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog0301_4.
Hurley, P. (2003). A concise introduction to logic. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Lascarides, A., & Asher, N. (1993). Temporal interpretation, discourse relations and commonsense entailment. Linguistics and Philosophy, 16, 437–493. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00986208.
Macagno, F. (2016). Argument relevance and structure. Assessing and developing students’ uses of evidence. International Journal of Educational Research, 79, 180–194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2016.07.002.
Macagno, F. (2018). Assessing relevance. Lingua, 210–211, 42–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2018.04.007.
Macagno, F., Mayweg-Paus, E., & Kuhn, D. (2015). Argumentation theory in education studies: Coding and improving students’ argumentative strategies. Topoi, 34(2), 523–537. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11245-014-9271-6.
Mauet, T. (2005). Trials: Strategy, skills, and the new power of persuasion. New York, NY: Aspen.
Nussbaum, M., & Edwards, O. V. (2011). Critical questions and argument stratagems: A framework for enhancing and analyzing students’ reasoning practices. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 20(3), 443–488. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2011.564567.
Rapanta, C., Garcia-Mila, M., & Gilabert, S. (2013). What is meant by argumentative competence? An integrative review of methods of analysis and assessment in education. Review of Educational Research, 83(4), 483–520. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654313487606.
Sperber, D., & Wilson, D. (1995). Relevance: Communication and cognition. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Taboada, M. (2009). Implicit and explicit coherence relations. In J. Renkema (Ed.), Discourse, of course: An overview of research in discourse studies (pp. 127–140). Amsterdam, Netherlands/Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins Publishing.
Walton, D. (1989). Question-reply argumentation. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.
Walton, D. (2003a). Defining conditional relevance using linked arguments and argumentation schemes: A commentary on professor Callen’s article, rationality and relevancy: Conditional relevancy and constrained resources. Michigan State Law Review, 4(4), 1305–1314.
Walton, D. (2003b). Relevance in argumentation. Amsterdam, Netherlands/Philadelphia, PA: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410609441.
Walton, D. (2004). Relevance in argumentation. Amsterdam, Netherlands/Philadelphia, PA: Routledge.
Walton, D., & Gordon, T. (2012). The Carneades model of argument invention. Pragmatics & Cognition, 20(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1075/pc.20.1.01wal.
Walton, D., & Krabbe, E. (1995). Commitment in dialogue. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Walton, D., & Macagno, F. (2016). Profiles of dialogue for relevance. Informal Logic, 36(4), 523–556. https://doi.org/10.22329/il.v36i4.4586.
Walton, D., & Macagno, F. (2019). Diagnosing Misattribution of Commitments: A Normative and Pragmatic Model of for Assessing Straw Man. In A. Capone, M. Carapezza, & F. Lo Piparo (Eds.), Further Advances in Pragmatics and Philosophy: Part 2 Theories and Applications (pp. 111-136). Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
Walton, D., Reed, C., & Macagno, F. (2008). Argumentation schemes. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Walton, D. (2021). Assessing Dialectical Relevance Using Argument Distance. In: Macagno, F., Capone, A. (eds) Inquiries in Philosophical Pragmatics. Perspectives in Pragmatics, Philosophy & Psychology, vol 27. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-56437-7_11
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-56437-7_11
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-56436-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-56437-7
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)