Results for 'Argumentation schemes'

1000+ found
Order:
  1.  34
    Argumentation Schemes.Douglas Neil Walton, Christopher Reed & Fabrizio Macagno - 2008 - Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.
    This book provides a systematic analysis of many common argumentation schemes and a compendium of 96 schemes. The study of these schemes, or forms of argument that capture stereotypical patterns of human reasoning, is at the core of argumentation research. Surveying all aspects of argumentation schemes from the ground up, the book takes the reader from the elementary exposition in the first chapter to the latest state of the art in the research efforts (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   169 citations  
  2. Argumentation Schemes.Douglas Walton, Chris Reed & Fabrizio Macagno - 2008 - Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.
    This book provides a systematic analysis of many common argumentation schemes and a compendium of 96 schemes. The study of these schemes, or forms of argument that capture stereotypical patterns of human reasoning, is at the core of argumentation research. Surveying all aspects of argumentation schemes from the ground up, the book takes the reader from the elementary exposition in the first chapter to the latest state of the art in the research efforts (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   191 citations  
  3.  93
    Argumentation Schemes for Presumptive Reasoning.Douglas N. Walton - 1996 - L. Erlbaum Associates.
    This book identifies 25 argumentation schemes for presumptive reasoning and matches a set of critical questions to each.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   194 citations  
  4.  63
    Argument Schemes—an Epistemological Approach.Christoph Lumer - 2011 - Argumentation. Cognition and Community. Proceedings of the 9th International Conference of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation (OSSA), May 18-22, 2011.
    The paper develops a classificatory system of basic argument types on the basis of the epis-temological approach to argumentation. This approach has provided strict rules for several kinds of argu-ments. These kinds may be brought into a system of basic irreducible types, which rely on different parts of epistemology: deductive logic, probability theory, utility theory. The system reduces a huge mass of differ-ent argument schemes to basic types and gives them an epistemological foundation.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  5.  15
    Representing Argumentation Schemes with Constraint Handling Rules.Thomas F. Gordon, Horst Friedrich & Douglas Walton - 2018 - Argument and Computation 9 (2):91-119.
    We present a high-level declarative programming language for representing argumentation schemes, where schemes represented in this language can be easily validated by domain experts, including developers of argumentation schemes in informal logic and philosophy, and serve as executable specifications for automatically constructing arguments, when applied to a set of assumptions. This new rule language for representing argumentation schemes is validated by using it to represent twenty representative argumentation schemes.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  6. Using Argument Schemes for Hypothetical Reasoning in Law.Trevor Bench-Capon & Henry Prakken - 2010 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 18 (2):153-174.
    This paper studies the use of hypothetical and value-based reasoning in US Supreme-Court cases concerning the United States Fourth Amendment. Drawing upon formal AI & Law models of legal argument a semi-formal reconstruction is given of parts of the Carney case, which has been studied previously in AI & law research on case-based reasoning. As part of the reconstruction, a semi-formal proposal is made for extending the formal AI & Law models with forms of metalevel reasoning in several argument (...). The result is compared with Rissland’s (1989) analysis in terms of dimensions and Ashley’s (2008) analysis in terms of his process model of legal argument with hypotheticals. (shrink)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   16 citations  
  7.  10
    Annotating Argument Schemes.Jacky Visser, John Lawrence, Chris Reed, Jean Wagemans & Douglas Walton - 2021 - Argumentation 35 (1):101-139.
    Argument schemes are abstractions substantiating the inferential connection between premise and conclusion in argumentative communication. Identifying such conventional patterns of reasoning is essential to the interpretation and evaluation of argumentation. Whether studying argumentation from a theory-driven or data-driven perspective, insight into the actual use of argumentation in communicative practice is essential. Large and reliably annotated corpora of argumentative discourse to quantitatively provide such insight are few and far between. This is all the more true for argument (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  8. Argumentation Schemes and Enthymemes.D. Walton & C. A. Reed - 2005 - Synthese 145 (3):339-370.
    The aim of this investigation is to explore the role of argumentation schemes in enthymeme reconstruction. This aim is pursued by studying selected cases of incomplete arguments in natural language discourse to see what the requirements are for filling in the unstated premises and conclusions in some systematic and useful way. Some of these cases are best handled using deductive tools, while others respond best to an analysis based on defeasible argumentations schemes. The approach is also shown (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   26 citations  
  9. On Argumentation Schemes and the Natural Classification of Arguments.J. Katzav & C. A. Reed - 2004 - Argumentation 18 (2):239-259.
    We develop conceptions of arguments and of argument types that will, by serving as the basis for developing a natural classification of arguments, benefit work in artificial intelligence. Focusing only on arguments construed as the semantic entities that are the outcome of processes of reasoning, we outline and clarify our view that an argument is a proposition that represents a fact as both conveying some other fact and as doing so wholly. Further, we outline our view that, with respect to (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   13 citations  
  10.  6
    From Argument Schemes to Argumentative Relations in the Wild: A Variety of Contributions to Argumentation Theory.Bart Garssen & Frans van Eemeren (eds.) - 2019 - Cham, Switzerland: Springer Verlag.
    This volume comprises a selection of contributions to the theorizing about argumentation that have been presented at the 9th conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation, held in Amsterdam in July 2018. The chapters included provide a general theoretical perspective on central topics in argumentation theory, such as argument schemes and the fallacies. Some contributions concentrate on the treatment of the concept of conductive argument. Other contributions are dedicated to specific issues such as (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  11.  20
    Argument Schemes for Reasoning About Trust.Simon Parsons, Katie Atkinson, Zimi Li, Peter McBurney, Elizabeth Sklar, Munindar Singh, Karen Haigh, Karl Levitt & Jeff Rowe - 2014 - Argument and Computation 5 (2-3):160-190.
    Trust is a natural mechanism by which an autonomous party, an agent, can deal with the inherent uncertainty regarding the behaviours of other parties and the uncertainty in the information it shares with those parties. Trust is thus crucial in any decentralised system. This paper builds on recent efforts to use argumentation to reason about trust. Specifically, a set of schemes is provided, and abstract patterns of reasoning that apply in multiple situations geared towards trust. Schemes are (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  12. AI & Law, Logic and Argument Schemes.Henry Prakken - 2005 - Argumentation 19 (3):303-320.
    This paper reviews the history of AI & Law research from the perspective of argument schemes. It starts with the observation that logic, although very well applicable to legal reasoning when there is uncertainty, vagueness and disagreement, is too abstract to give a fully satisfactory classification of legal argument types. It therefore needs to be supplemented with an argument-scheme approach, which classifies arguments not according to their logical form but according to their content, in particular, according to the roles (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   20 citations  
  13.  16
    Argumentation Schemes in Dialogue.Chris Reed & Douglas Walton - unknown
    This paper uses the language of formal dialectics to explore how argumentation schemes and their critical questions can be characterized as an extension to traditional dialectical systems. The aim is to construct a dialectical system in which the set of locutions is extended to include scheme-based moves the set of structural rules describes the roles that critical questioning can play; and the set of commitment rules distinguishes between exceptions and assumptions.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  14.  34
    Argumentation Schemes in Persuasive Brochures.Peter Jan Schellens & Menno de Jong - 2004 - Argumentation 18 (3):295-323.
    Many public information documents attempt to persuade the recipients that they should engage in or refrain from specific behaviour. This is based on the assumption that the recipient will decide about his or her behaviour on the basis of the information given and a rational evaluation of the pros and cons. An analysis of 20 public information brochures shows that the argumentation in persuasive brochures is often not marked as such. Argumentation is presented as factual information, and in (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  15.  73
    Walton's Argumentation Schemes for Presumptive Reasoning: A Critique and Development. [REVIEW]J. Anthony Blair - 2001 - Argumentation 15 (4):365-379.
    The aim of the paper is to advance the theory of argument or inference schemes by suggesting answers to questions raised by Walton's Argumentation Schemes for Presumptive Reasoning (1996), specifically on: the relation between argument and reasoning; distinguishing deductive from presumptive schemes, the origin of schemes and the probative force of their use; and the motivation and justification for their associated critical questions.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   20 citations  
  16.  32
    Analogical Argument Schemes and Complex Argument Structure.Andre Juthe - 2015 - Informal Logic 35 (3):378-445.
    This paper addresses several issues in argumentation theory. The over-arching goal is to discuss how a theory of analogical argument schemes fits the pragma-dialectical theory of argument schemes and argument structures, and how one should properly reconstruct both single and complex argumentation by analogy. I also propose a unified model that explains how formal valid deductive argumentation relates to argument schemes in general and to analogical argument schemes in particular. The model suggests “scheme-specific-validity” (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  17.  88
    Dialectical Argumentation with Argumentation Schemes: An Approach to Legal Logic. [REVIEW]Bart Verheij - 2003 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 11 (2-3):167-195.
    This paper describes an approach to legal logic based on the formal analysis of argumentation schemes. Argumentation schemes a notion borrowed from the .eld of argumentation theory - are a kind of generalized rules of inference, in the sense that they express that given certain premises a particular conclusion can be drawn. However, argumentation schemes need not concern strict, abstract, necessarily valid patterns of reasoning, but can be defeasible, concrete and contingently valid, i.e., (...)
    Direct download (10 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   50 citations  
  18.  11
    Argument Schemes and Visualization Software for Critical Thinking About International Politics.Nancy L. Green, Michael Branon & Luke Roosje - 2018 - Argument and Computation 10 (1):41-53.
  19.  36
    Argument Schemes in Computer System Safety Engineering.Tangming Yuan & Tim Kelly - 2011 - Informal Logic 31 (2):89-109.
    Safe Safety arguments are key components in a safety case. Too often, safety arguments are constructed without proper reasoning. To address this, we argue that informal logic argument schemes have important roles to play in safety argument construction and reviewing process. Ten commonly used reasoning schemes in computer system safety domain are proposed. The role of informal logic dialogue games in computer system safety arguments reviewing is also discussed and the intended work in this area is proposed. It (...)
    Direct download (13 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  20. Argumentation Schemes and Historical Origins of the Circumstantial Ad Hominem Argument.D. N. Walton - 2004 - Argumentation 18 (3):359-368.
    There are two views of the ad hominem argument found in the textbooks and other traditional treatments of this argument, the Lockean or ex concessis view and the view of ad hominem as personal attack. This article addresses problems posed by this ambiguity. In particular, it discusses the problem of whether Aristotle's description of the ex concessis type of argument should count as evidence that he had identified the circumstantial ad hominem argument. Argumentation schemes are used as the (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  21.  28
    How to Disagree About Argument Schemes.Fábio Perin Shecaira - 2016 - Informal Logic 36 (4):500-522.
    Argumentation theorists often disagree about which scheme best represents a given type of argument. Unfortunately, authors sometimes become involved in fruitless pseudo-agreement because they fail to perceive that their supposedly competing schemes are means for achieving different practical or theoretical goals. This paper explains some of the different purposes that an argument scheme may serve, and it indicates how the relevant type of pseudo-disagreement may be avoided.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  22.  99
    A Classification System for Argumentation Schemes.Douglas Walton & Fabrizio Macagno - 2016 - Argument and Computation 6 (3):219-245.
    This paper explains the importance of classifying argumentation schemes, and outlines how schemes are being used in current research in artificial intelligence and computational linguistics on argument mining. It provides a survey of the literature on scheme classification. What are so far generally taken to represent a set of the most widely useful defeasible argumentation schemes are surveyed and explained systematically, including some that are difficult to classify. A new classification system covering these centrally important (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  23.  15
    Supporting Argumentation Schemes in Argumentative Dialogue Games.Simon Wells - 2014 - Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric 36 (1):171-191.
    This paper reports preliminary work into the exploitation of argumentation schemes within dialogue games. We identify a property of dialogue games that we call “scheme awareness” that captures the relationship between dialogue game systems and argumentation schemes. Scheme awareness is used to examine the ways in which existing dialogue games utilise argumentation schemes and consequently the degree with which a dialogue game can be used to construct argument structures. The aim is to develop a (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  24.  11
    Argumentation Schemes in Argument-as-Process and Argument-as-Product.Chris Reed & Douglas Walton - unknown
  25. Enthymemes, Argumentation Schemes, and Topics.Fabrizio Macagno & Douglas Walton - 2009 - Logique Et Analyse 52 (205):39-56.
  26.  72
    Teleological Justification of Argumentation Schemes.Douglas Walton & Giovanni Sartor - 2013 - Argumentation 27 (2):111-142.
    Argumentation schemes are forms of reasoning that are fallible but correctable within a self-correcting framework. Their use provides a basis for taking rational action or for reasonably accepting a conclusion as a tentative hypothesis, but they are not deductively valid. We argue that teleological reasoning can provide the basis for justifying the use of argument schemes both in monological and dialogical reasoning. We consider how such a teleological justification, besides being inspired by the aim of directing a (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  27.  9
    Justification of Argument Schemes.Douglas Walton - 2005 - Australasian Journal of Logic 3:1-13.
    Argumentation schemes are forms of argument that capture stereotypical patterns of human reasoning, especially defeasible ones like argument from expert opinion, that have proved troublesome to view deductively or inductively. Much practical work has already been done on argumentation schemes, proving their worth in AI, but more precise investigations are needed to formalize their structures. The problem posed in this paper is what form justification of a given scheme, as having a certain precise structure of inference, (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   14 citations  
  28.  25
    A Classification System for Argumentation Schemes.Douglas Walton & Fabrizio Macagno - 2015 - New Publisher: Ios Press 6 (3):219-245.
    This paper explains the importance of classifying argumentation schemes, and outlines how schemes are being used in current research in artificial intelligence and computational linguistics on argu...
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  29.  46
    The Oldest Typology of Argumentation Schemes.Antoine C. Braet - 2004 - Argumentation 18 (1):127-148.
    The Rhetoric to Alexander (about 340 B.C.) contains a list of proofs (pisteis) and other types of argumentation which may be seen as the oldest surviving typology of argumentation schemes (avant la lettre). In the present article this typology is derived and compared with modern proposals. The conclusion is that the oldest typology is surprisingly similar to the most recent classifications.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   12 citations  
  30.  13
    Rhetorical Figures as Argument Schemes – The Proleptic Suite.Ashley Rose Mehlenbacher - 2017 - Argument and Computation 8 (3):233-252.
  31.  6
    Inference in Argumentation: A Topics-Based Approach to Argument Schemes.Sara Greco & Eddo Rigotti - 2019 - Springer Verlag.
    This book investigates the role of inference in argumentation, considering how arguments support standpoints on the basis of different loci. The authors propose and illustrate a model for the analysis of the standpoint-argument connection, called Argumentum Model of Topics. A prominent feature of the AMT is that it distinguishes, within each and every single argumentation, between an inferential-procedural component, on which the reasoning process is based; and a material-contextual component, which anchors the argument in the interlocutors’ cultural and (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   14 citations  
  32.  59
    A Normative Framework for Argument Quality: Argumentation Schemes with a Bayesian Foundation.Ulrike Hahn & Jos Hornikx - 2016 - Synthese 193 (6):1833-1873.
    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. (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   20 citations  
  33.  39
    Advances in the Theory of Argumentation Schemes and Critical Questions.David Godden & Douglas Walton - 2007 - Informal Logic 27 (3):267-292.
    This paper begins a working through of Blair’s (2001) theoretical agenda concerning argumentation schemes and their attendant critical questions, in which we propose a number of solutions to some outstanding theoretical issues. We consider the classification of schemes, their ultimate nature, their role in argument reconstruction, their foundation as normative categories of argument, and the evaluative role of critical questions.We demonstrate the role of schemes in argument reconstruction, and defend a normative account of their nature against (...)
    Direct download (11 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   14 citations  
  34. What Students' Arguments Can Tell Us: Using Argumentation Schemes in Science Education.Fabrizio Macagno & Aikaterini Konstantinidou - 2013 - Argumentation 27 (3):225-243.
    The relationship between teaching and argumentation is becoming a crucial issue in the field of education and, in particular, science education. Teaching has been analyzed as a dialogue aimed at persuading the interlocutors, introducing a conceptual change that needs to be grounded on the audience’s background knowledge. This paper addresses this issue from a perspective of argumentation studies. Our claim is that argumentation schemes, namely abstract patterns of argument, can be an instrument for reconstructing the tacit (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  35.  12
    Understanding Students’ Reasoning: Argumentation Schemes as an Interpretation Method in Science Education.Aikaterini Konstantinidou & Fabrizio Macagno - 2013 - Science & Education 22 (5):1069-1087.
  36. 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.
    This paper studies the modelling of legal reasoning about evidence within general theories of defeasible reasoning and argumentation. In particular, Wigmore's method for charting evidence and its use by modern legal evidence scholars is studied in order to give a formal underpinning in terms of logics for defeasible argumentation. Two notions turn out to be crucial, viz. argumentation schemes and empirical generalisations.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   46 citations  
  37.  13
    A Functional Perspective on Argumentation Schemes.Adam Wyner - 2016 - Argument and Computation 7 (2-3):113-133.
  38. Common Knowledge and Argumentation Schemes .Fabrizio Macagno & Douglas Walton - 2005 - Studies in Communication Sciences 5 (2):1-22.
    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 (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  39.  47
    The Common Topic in Aristotle’s Rhetoric: Precursor of the Argumentation Scheme.Antoine C. Braet - 2005 - Argumentation 19 (1):65-83.
    In the present article I attribute to the common topic in the Rhetoric a two-fold suggestive function and a guarantee function. These three functions are possible because this type of topic, while often quite abstract, nevertheless contains thought-steering, substantial terms, and formulates a generally empirical or normative endoxon. Assuming that according to Aristotle an enthymeme has at least two premises, it would appear that a common topic is the abstract principle behind the often implicit major premise. This means that the (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  40.  8
    Applications of Argumentation Schemes.Chris Reed & Doug Walton - unknown
  41.  16
    Challenges and Remedies for Identifying and Classifying Argumentation Schemes.Robert Anthony & Mijung Kim - 2015 - Argumentation 29 (1):81-113.
    The development of a framework for coding argumentations schemes in the transcripts of classroom dialogical deliberations on controversial, socioscientific topics is described. Arriving at a coding framework involved resolving a number of complex issues and challenges that are discussed in order to create practical remedies. The description of the development process is based on audio recordings and written exchanges between the authors as they attempted to resolve differences in the interpretation and application of argumentation schemes . These (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  42.  5
    Argumentation Schemes: From Genetics to International Relations to Environmental Science Policy to AI Ethics.Nancy L. Green - 2021 - Argument and Computation 12 (3):397-416.
    Argumentation schemes have played a key role in our research projects on computational models of natural argument over the last decade. The catalogue of schemes in Walton, Reed and Macagno’s 2008 book, Argumentation Schemes, served as our starting point for analysis of the naturally occurring arguments in written text, i.e., text in different genres having different types of author, audience, and subject domain, for different argument goals, and for different possible future applications. We would often (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  43.  1
    Argumentation Schemes for Clinical Decision Support.Isabel Sassoon, Nadin Kökciyan, Sanjay Modgil & Simon Parsons - 2021 - Argument and Computation 12 (3):329-355.
    This paper demonstrates how argumentation schemes can be used in decision support systems that help clinicians in making treatment decisions. The work builds on the use of computational argumentation, a rigorous approach to reasoning with complex data that places strong emphasis on being able to justify and explain the decisions that are recommended. The main contribution of the paper is to present a novel set of specialised argumentation schemes that can be used in the context (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  44.  3
    Towards a Formal Account of Reasoning About Evidence: Argumentation Schemes and Generalizations.Bex Floris, Prakken Henry, Reed Chris & Walton Douglas - 2003 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 12 (2-3):125-165.
    This paper studies the modelling of legal reasoning about evidence within general theories of defeasible reasoning and argumentation. In particular, Wigmore's method for charting evidence and its use by modern legal evidence scholars is studied in order to give a formal underpinning in terms of logics for defeasible argumentation. Two notions turn out to be crucial, viz. argumentation schemes and empirical generalisations.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   27 citations  
  45.  36
    Argument Schemes From the Point of View of Hamblin's Dialectic.Jan A. van Laar - 2011 - Informal Logic 31 (4):344-366.
    This paper aims at a normative account of non-deductive argumentation schemes in the spirit of Hamblin’s dialectical philosophy. First, three principles are presented that characterize Hamblin’s dialectical stance. Second, argumentation schemes, which have hardly been examined in Hamblin’s book Fallacies, shall be dealt with by applying these principles, taking an argumentation scheme from authority as the leading example. Third, a formal dialectical system, along the lines indicated by Hamblin, shall be developed that includes norms for (...)
    Direct download (12 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  46.  12
    Argumentation Schemes in AI and Law.Katie Atkinson & Trevor Bench-Capon - 2021 - Argument and Computation 12 (3):417-434.
    In this paper we describe the impact that Walton’s conception of argumentation schemes had on AI and Law research. We will discuss developments in argumentation in AI and Law before Walton’s schemes became known in that community, and the issues that were current in that work. We will then show how Walton’s schemes provided a means of addressing all of those issues, and so supplied a unifying perspective from which to view argumentation in AI (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  47.  51
    Argumentation Schemes and Communities of Argumentational Practice.Andrew Aberdein - 2009 - In Juho Ritola (ed.), Argument Cultures: Proceedings of OSSA 2009. OSSA.
    Is it possible to distinguish communities of arguers by tracking the argumentation schemes they employ? There are many ways of relating schemes to communities, but not all are productive. Attention must be paid not only to the admissibility of schemes within a community of argumentational practice, but also to their comparative frequency. Two examples are discussed: informal mathematics, a convenient source of well-documented argumentational practice, and anthropological evidence of nonstandard reasoning.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  48. Visualization Tools, Argumentation Schemes and Expert Opinion Evidence in Law.Douglas Walton - manuscript
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  49. Argumentation Schemes From Hamblin's Dialectical Perspective.Jan Albert van Laar - 2011 - Informal Logic 31 (4):344-366.
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  50. Inference/Argument Schemes: The Missing Theory of Inference?J. Blair - 1999 - ProtoSociology 13.
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
1 — 50 / 1000