- New
-
Topics
- All Categories
- Metaphysics and Epistemology
- Value Theory
- Science, Logic, and Mathematics
- Science, Logic, and Mathematics
- Logic and Philosophy of Logic
- Philosophy of Biology
- Philosophy of Cognitive Science
- Philosophy of Computing and Information
- Philosophy of Mathematics
- Philosophy of Physical Science
- Philosophy of Social Science
- Philosophy of Probability
- General Philosophy of Science
- Philosophy of Science, Misc
- History of Western Philosophy
- Philosophical Traditions
- Philosophy, Misc
- Other Academic Areas
- Journals
- Submit material
- More
Examination dialogue: An argumentation framework for critically questioning an expert opinion
Abstract
This article has no associated abstract. (fix it)Author's Profile
My notes
Similar books and articles
Argument from Expert Opinion as Legal Evidence: Critical Questions and Admissibility Criteria of Expert Testimony in the American Legal System.David M. Godden & Douglas Walton - 2006 - Ratio Juris 19 (3):261-286.
Is there a burden of questioning?Douglas Walton - 2003 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 11 (1):1-43.
Expertise, Argumentation, and the End of Inquiry.Axel Gelfert - 2011 - Argumentation 25 (3):297-312.
Visualization tools, argumentation schemes and expert opinion evidence in law.Douglas Walton - manuscript
Experts in uncertainty: opinion and subjective probability in science.Roger M. Cooke (ed.) - 1991 - New York: Oxford University Press.
Dialectics, Dialogue and Argumentation: An Examination of Douglas Walton's Theories of Reasoning and Argument.C. Tindale & C. Reed (eds.) - 2010 - College Publications.
Experts in Dialogue: An Introduction. [REVIEW]Gábor Kutrovátz & Gábor Á Zemplén - 2011 - Argumentation 25 (3):275-283.
Dialectical and heuristic arguments: presumptions and burden of proof.Fabrizio Macagno - 2010 - In C. Tindale & C. Reed (eds.), Dialectics, Dialogue and Argumentation: An Examination of Douglas Walton's Theories of Reasoning and Argument. College Publications. pp. 45-57.
The Assessment of Argumentation from Expert Opinion.Jean H. M. Wagemans - 2011 - Argumentation 25 (3):329-339.
Analytics
Added to PP
2009-01-28
Downloads
8 (#1,215,626)
6 months
1 (#1,346,405)
2009-01-28
Downloads
8 (#1,215,626)
6 months
1 (#1,346,405)
Historical graph of downloads
Author's Profile
Citations of this work
Conceptual challenges for interpretable machine learning.David S. Watson - 2022 - Synthese 200 (2):1-33.
Dialectical Relevance and Dialogical Context in Walton’s Pragmatic Theory.Fabrizio Macagno - 2008 - Informal Logic 28 (2):102-128.
Mizrahi and Seidel: Experts in Confusion.Martin David Hinton - 2015 - Informal Logic 35 (4):539-554.
About Old and New Dialectic: Dialogues, Fallacies, and Strategies.Erik C. W. Krabbe & Jan Albert van Laar - 2007 - Informal Logic 27 (1):27-58.
PhilPapers logo by Andrea Andrews and Meghan Driscoll.
This site uses cookies and Google Analytics (see our terms & conditions for details regarding the privacy implications). Use of this site is subject to terms & conditions.
All rights reserved by The PhilPapers Foundation
Server: philpapers-web-67c5d994d4-kg9jj uwo