Studies in Communication Sciences 5 (2):1-22 (2005)
We argue that common knowledge, of the kind used in reasoning in law and computing is best analyzed using a dialogue model of argumentation (Walton & Krabbe 1995). In this model, implicit premises resting on common knowledge are analyzed as endoxa or widely accepted opinions and generalizations (Tardini 2005). We argue that, in this sense, common knowledge is not really knowledge of the kind represent by belief and/or knowledge of the epistemic kind studied in current epistemology. This paper takes a different approach, defining it in relation to a common commitment store of two participants in a rule-governed dialogue in which two parties engage in rational argumentation (Jackson & Jacobs 1980; van Eemeren & Grootendorst 2004). A theme of the paper is how arguments containing common knowledge premises can be studied with the help of argumentation schemes for arguments from generally accepted opinion and expert opinion. It is argued that common knowledge is a species of provi- sional acceptance of a premise that is not in dispute at a given point in a dia- logue, but may later be defeated as the discussion proceeds
|Keywords||enthymemes legal argumentation metadialogues generally accepted opinions evidence generalizations defeasible reasoning|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Dichotomies and Oppositions in Legal Argumentation.Fabrizio Macagno & Douglas Walton - 2010 - Ratio Juris 23 (2):229-257.
Similar books and articles
Argumentation Schemes.Douglas Walton, Chris Reed & Fabrizio Macagno - 2008 - Cambridge University Press.
Dialectical Argumentation with Argumentation Schemes: An Approach to Legal Logic. [REVIEW]Bart Verheij - 2003 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 11 (2-3):167-195.
Walton's Argumentation Schemes for Presumptive Reasoning: A Critique and Development. [REVIEW]J. Anthony Blair - 2001 - Argumentation 15 (4):365-379.
Solving a Murder Case by Asking Critical Questions: An Approach to Fact-Finding in Terms of Argumentation and Story Schemes. [REVIEW]Floris Bex & Bart Verheij - 2012 - Argumentation 26 (3):325-353.
What Students' Arguments Can Tell Us: Using Argumentation Schemes in Science Education. [REVIEW]Fabrizio Macagno & Aikaterini Konstantinidou - 2013 - Argumentation 27 (3):225-243.
The Oldest Typology of Argumentation Schemes.Antoine C. Braet - 2004 - Argumentation 18 (1):127-148.
Computational Dialectic and Rhetorical Invention.Douglas Walton - 2012 - AI and Society 26 (1):2011.
Argumentation Schemes and Communities of Argumentational Practice.Andrew Aberdein - 2009 - In Juho Ritola (ed.), Argument Cultures: Proceedings of OSSA 2009. OSSA.
Towards a Formal Account of Reasoning About Evidence: Argumentation Schemes and Generalisations. [REVIEW]Floris Bex, Henry Prakken, Chris Reed & Douglas Walton - 2003 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 11 (2-3):125-165.
D. N. Walton, Argumentation Schemes for Presumptive Reasoning.J. Anthony Blair - 1999 - Argumentation 13 (3):338-343.
Argumentation Schemes in Persuasive Brochures.Peter Jan Schellens & Menno de Jong - 2004 - Argumentation 18 (3):295-323.
Argumentation Schemes and Historical Origins of the Circumstantial Ad Hominem Argument.D. N. Walton - 2004 - Argumentation 18 (3):359-368.
Added to index2011-01-30
Total downloads356 ( #7,951 of 2,178,228 )
Recent downloads (6 months)30 ( #9,486 of 2,178,228 )
How can I increase my downloads?