Philosophy and Technology 28 (2):167-188 (2015)

Michael H. G. Hoffmann
Georgia Institute of Technology
Technology is not only an object of philosophical reflection but also something that can change this reflection. This paper discusses the potential of computer-supported argument visualization tools for coping with the complexity of philosophical arguments. I will show, in particular, how the interactive and web-based argument mapping software “AGORA-net” can change the practice of philosophical reflection, communication, and collaboration. AGORA-net allows the graphical representation of complex argumentations in logical form and the synchronous and asynchronous collaboration on those “argument maps” on the internet. Web-based argument mapping can overcome limits of space, time, and access, and it can empower users from all over the world to clarify their reasoning and to participate in deliberation and debate. Collaborative and web-based argument mapping tools such as AGORA-net can change the practice of arguing in two dimensions. First, arguing on web-based argument maps in both collaborative and adversarial form can lead to a fundamental shift in the way arguments are produced and debated. It can provide an alternative to the traditional four-step process of writing, publishing, debating, and responding in new writing with its clear distinction between individual and social activities by a process in which these four steps happen virtually simultaneously, and individual and social activities become more closely intertwined. Second, by replacing the linear form of arguments through graphical representations of networks of inferential relations which can grow over time in an infinite space, these tools do not only allow a clear visualization of structures and relations, but also forms of collaboration in which, for example, participants work on different “construction zones” of larger argument maps, or debates are performed at specific points of disagreement on those maps. I introduce the term synergetic logosymphysis to describe a practice that combines these two dimensions of collaborative- and web-based argument mapping
Keywords AGORA-net  Argument mapping  Complexity  Internet  Philosophical technologies
Categories No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/s13347-013-0143-6
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: 57,156
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

Reason, Truth and History.Hilary Putnam - 1981 - Cambridge University Press.
Argumentation Schemes.Douglas Walton, Chris Reed & Fabrizio Macagno - 2008 - Cambridge University Press.

View all 25 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Argument Maps Improve Critical Thinking.Charles Twardy - 2004 - Teaching Philosophy 27 (2):95--116.
Mapping the Structure of Debate.Jeffrey Yoshimi - 2004 - Informal Logic 24 (1):1-22.
A Carneades Reconstruction of Popov V Hayashi.Thomas F. Gordon & Douglas Walton - 2012 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 20 (1):37-56.
Argumentation Without Arguments.Henry Prakken - 2011 - Argumentation 25 (2):171-184.
Paley’s Argument for Design.Graham Oppy - 2002 - Philo 5 (2):161-173.
Computer-Aided Argument Mapping and the Teaching of Critical Thinking (Part 1).Martin Davies - 2012 - Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines 27 (2):15-30.
On a Certain Form of Philosophical Argument.Henry E. Kyburg - 1970 - American Philosophical Quarterly 7 (3):229-237.


Added to PP index

Total views
39 ( #260,437 of 2,411,746 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
4 ( #188,160 of 2,411,746 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes