Authors
Douglas Walton
University of Windsor
Abstract
This paper presents a formalization of informal logic using the Carneades Argumentation System, a formal, computational model of argument that consists of a formal model of argument graphs and audiences. Conflicts between pro and con arguments are resolved using proof standards, such as preponderance of the evidence. Carneades also formalizes argumentation schemes. Schemes can be used to check whether a given argument instantiates the types of argument deemed normatively appropriate for the type of dialogue.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
Options
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: 52,792
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

Acts of Arguing, A Rhetorical Model of Argument (ARNO R. LODDER).C. W. Tindale - 1999 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 9 (1):73-78.
Argument Structure a Pragmatic Theory.Douglas Walton - 1996 - University of Toronto Press.

View all 14 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Story Similarity in Arguments From Analogy.Douglas Walton - 2012 - Informal Logic 32 (2):190-221.
How Philosophical is Informal Logic?John Woods - 2000 - Informal Logic 20 (2).
Formal Logic for Informal Logicians.David Sherry - 2006 - Informal Logic 26 (2):199-220.
Argument Has No Function.Jean Goodwin - 2007 - Informal Logic 27 (1):69-90.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2015-04-02

Total views
12 ( #725,318 of 2,341,549 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #514,645 of 2,341,549 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes