Synthese 193 (6):1833-1873 (2016)
Authors |
|
Abstract |
In this paper, it is argued that the most fruitful approach to developing normative models of argument quality is one that combines the argumentation scheme approach with Bayesian argumentation. Three sample argumentation schemes from the literature are discussed: the argument from sign, the argument from expert opinion, and the appeal to popular opinion. Limitations of the scheme-based treatment of these argument forms are identified and it is shown how a Bayesian perspective may help to overcome these. At the same time, the contributions of the standard scheme-based approach are highlighted, and it is argued that only a combination of the insights of different traditions will yield a complete normative theory of argument quality.
|
Keywords | Argumentation Rationality Testimony Evidence Inference |
Categories | (categorize this paper) |
DOI | 10.1007/s11229-015-0815-0 |
Options |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Download options
References found in this work BETA
The New Rhetoric: A Treatise on Argumentation.Chaïm Perelman - 1969 - Notre Dame, [Ind.]University of Notre Dame Press.
View all 61 references / Add more references
Citations of this work BETA
A Probabilistic Analysis of Argument Cogency.David Godden & Frank Zenker - 2018 - Synthese 195 (4):1715-1740.
Bayesian Argumentation and the Value of Logical Validity.Benjamin Eva & Stephan Hartmann - 2018 - Psychological Review 125 (5):806-821.
Editors' Review and Introduction: Models of Rational Proof in Criminal Law.Henry Prakken, Floris Bex & Anne Ruth Mackor - 2020 - Topics in Cognitive Science 12 (4):1053-1067.
Logic, Reasoning, Argumentation: Insights From the Wild.Frank Zenker - 2018 - Logic and Logical Philosophy 27 (4):421-451.
Causal Argument.Ulrike Hahn, Frank Zenker & Roland Bluhm - 2017 - In Michael R. Waldmann (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Causal Reasoning. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. pp. 475-494.
View all 16 citations / Add more citations
Similar books and articles
A Normative Theory of Argument Strength.Ulrike Hahn & Mike Oaksford - 2006 - Informal Logic 26 (1):1-24.
Because Hitler Did It! Quantitative Tests of Bayesian Argumentation Using Ad Hominem.Adam J. L. Harris, Anne S. Hsu & Jens K. Madsen - 2012 - Thinking and Reasoning 18 (3):311 - 343.
Evaluating Corroborative Evidence.Douglas Walton & Chris Reed - 2008 - Argumentation 22 (4):531-553.
Dialectical Argumentation with Argumentation Schemes: An Approach to Legal Logic. [REVIEW]Bart Verheij - 2003 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 11 (2-3):167-195.
Argument Schemes From the Point of View of Hamblin's Dialectic.Jan A. van Laar - 2011 - Informal Logic 31 (4):344-366.
Argument Content and Argument Source: An Exploration.Ulrike Hahn, Adam J. L. Harris & Adam Corner - 2009 - Informal Logic 29 (4):337-367.
Representation of Argumentation in Text with Rhetorical Structure Theory.Nancy L. Green - 2010 - Argumentation 24 (2):181-196.
On a Razor's Edge: Evaluating Arguments From Expert Opinion.Douglas Walton - 2014 - Argument and Computation 5 (2-3):139-159.
Argumentation Schemes and Historical Origins of the Circumstantial Ad Hominem Argument.D. N. Walton - 2004 - Argumentation 18 (3):359-368.
Normative Theories of Argumentation: Are Some Norms Better Than Others?Adam Corner & Ulrike Hahn - 2013 - Synthese 190 (16):3579-3610.
Why Logic Doesn 'T Matter in the (Philosophical) Study of Argumentation'.Tim6 Heysse - 1997 - Argumentation 11 (2):211-224.
Walton's Argumentation Schemes for Presumptive Reasoning: A Critique and Development. [REVIEW]J. Anthony Blair - 2001 - Argumentation 15 (4):365-379.
Analytics
Added to PP index
2015-07-22
Total views
56 ( #178,331 of 2,411,721 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #346,256 of 2,411,721 )
2015-07-22
Total views
56 ( #178,331 of 2,411,721 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #346,256 of 2,411,721 )
How can I increase my downloads?
Downloads