Argument and Computation 1 (1):71-91 (2010)

Authors
Abstract
This article proposes a cost-benefit analysis of argumentation, with the aim of highlighting the strategic considerations that govern the agent's decision to argue or not. In spite of its paramount importance, the topic of argumentative decision-making has not received substantial attention in argumentation theories so far. We offer an explanation for this lack of consideration and propose a tripartite taxonomy and detailed description of the strategic reasons considered by arguers in their decision-making: benefits, costs, and dangers. We insist that the implications of acknowledging the strategic dimension of arguing are far-reaching, including promising insights on how to develop better argumentation technologies
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
Reprint years 2011
DOI 10.1080/19462160903494584
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 62,481
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Knowledge in a Social World.Alvin I. Goldman - 1999 - Oxford University Press.

View all 33 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Adversariality and Argumentation.John Casey - 2020 - Informal Logic 40 (1):77-108.
A Plea for Ecological Argument Technologies.Fabio Paglieri - 2017 - Philosophy and Technology 30 (2):209-238.

View all 20 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP index
2010-07-27

Total views
49 ( #216,303 of 2,446,271 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
3 ( #231,958 of 2,446,271 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes