Argument Content and Argument Source: An Exploration

Informal Logic 29 (4):337-367 (2009)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Argumentation is pervasive in everyday life. Understanding what makes a strong argument is therefore of both theoretical and practical interest. One factor that seems intuitively important to the strength of an argument is the reliability of the source providing it. Whilst traditional approaches to argument evaluation are silent on this issue, the Bayesian approach to argumentation (Hahn & Oaksford, 2007) is able to capture important aspects of source reliability. In particular, the Bayesian approach predicts that argument content and source reliability should interact to determine argument strength. In this paper, we outline the approach and then demonstrate the importance of source reliability in two empirical studies. These experiments show the multiplicative relationship between the content and the source of the argument predicted by the Bayesian framework

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 76,215

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Defending Direct Source Incompatibilism.Eric Yang - 2012 - Acta Analytica 27 (3):325-333.
What’s the matter with epistemic circularity?David James Barnett - 2014 - Philosophical Studies 171 (2):177-205.
The Argument from Silence.Timothy McGrew - 2014 - Acta Analytica 29 (2):215-228.
Empirical Evidence for Rationalism?Joel Pust - 2014 - In Darrell Rowbottom & Anthony Booth (eds.), Intuitions. Oxford University Press.
Is Epistemic Circularity Bad?Matthias Steup - 2013 - Res Philosophica 90 (2):215-235.

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-11-24

Downloads
105 (#119,723)

6 months
1 (#449,220)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?