13 found
Order:
Disambiguations
Sally Jackson [15]Sally Ann Jackson [1]
  1.  53
    Design Thinking in Argumentation Theory and Practice.Sally Jackson - 2015 - Argumentation 29 (3):243-263.
    This essay proposes a design perspective on argumentation, intended as complementary to empirical and critical scholarship. In any substantive domain, design can provide insights that differ from those provided by scientific or humanistic perspectives. For argumentation, the key advantage of a design perspective is the recognition that humanity’s natural capacity for reason and reasonableness can be extended through inventions that improve on unaided human intellect. Historically, these inventions have fallen into three broad classes: logical systems, scientific methods, and disputation frameworks. (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   23 citations  
  2.  22
    Reasonableness and Effectiveness in Argumentative Discourse.Scott Jacobs, Sally Jackson, Frans Eemeren & Frans H. van Eemeren (eds.) - 2015 - Springer Verlag.
    How do Dutch people let each other know that they disagree? What do they say when they want to resolve their difference of opinion by way of an argumentative discussion? In what way do they convey that they are convinced by each other’s argumentation? How do they criticize each other’s argumentative moves? Which words and expressions do they use in these endeavors? By answering these questions this short essay provides a brief inventory of the language of argumentation in Dutch.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   11 citations  
  3. Cochrane Review as a “Warranting Device” for Reasoning About Health.Sally Jackson & Jodi Schneider - 2018 - Argumentation 32 (2):241-272.
    Contemporary reasoning about health is infused with the work products of experts, and expert reasoning about health itself is an active site for invention and design. Building on Toulmin’s largely undeveloped ideas on field-dependence, we argue that expert fields can develop new inference rules that, together with the backing they require, become accepted ways of drawing and defending conclusions. The new inference rules themselves function as warrants, and we introduce the term “warranting device” to refer to an assembly of the (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  4.  7
    Reason-Giving and the Natural Normativity of Argumentation.Sally Jackson - 2019 - Topoi 38 (4):631-643.
    Argument is a pervasive feature of human interaction, and in its natural contexts of occurrence, it is organized around the management of disagreement. Since disagreement can occur around any kind of speech act whatsoever, not all arguments involve a claim supported by reasons; many involve standpoints attributed to someone but claimed by no one. And although truth and validity are often at issue in naturally occurring arguments, these do not exhaust the standards to which arguers are held. Arguers hold one (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  5.  13
    Reason-Giving and the Natural Normativity of Argumentation.Sally Jackson - 2019 - Topoi 38 (4):631-643.
    Argument is a pervasive feature of human interaction, and in its natural contexts of occurrence, it is organized around the management of disagreement. Since disagreement can occur around any kind of speech act whatsoever, not all arguments involve a claim supported by reasons; many involve standpoints attributed to someone but claimed by no one. And although truth and validity are often at issue in naturally occurring arguments, these do not exhaust the standards to which arguers are held. Arguers hold one (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  6.  91
    Disputation by Design.Sally Jackson - 1997 - Argumentation 12 (2):183-198.
    In normative pragmatics, a kind of empirical discourse analysis organized by normative theory, the analysis of any communication process begins with an idealized model of the discourse that can be compared with actual practices. Idealizations of argumentation can be found, among other places, in theoretical descriptions of ‘critical discussion’ and other dialogue types. Comparing ideal models with actual practices can pinpoint defects in the models (leading to theoretical refinements), but it can also identify deficiencies in practice. This latter possibility invites (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   10 citations  
  7.  16
    Relevance and Digressions in Argumentative Discussion: A Pragmatic Approach.Scott Jacobs & Sally Jackson - 1992 - Argumentation 6 (2):161-176.
    Digressions in argumentative discussion are a kind of failure of relevance. Examination of what actual cases look like reveals several properties of argumentative relevance: (1) The informational relevance of propositions to the truth value of a conclusion should be distinguished from the pragmatic relevance of argumentative acts to the task of resolving a disagreement. (2) Pragmatic irrelevance is a collaborative phenomenon. It does not just short-circuit reasoning; it encourages a failure to take up the demands of an argumentative task. (3) (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   10 citations  
  8.  18
    Black Box Arguments.Sally Jackson - 2008 - Argumentation 22 (3):437-446.
    “Black box argument” is a metaphor for modular components of argumentative discussion that are, within a particular discussion, not open to expansion. In public policy debate such as the controversy over abstinence-only sex education, scientific conclusions enter the discourse as black boxes consisting of a result returned from an external and largely impenetrable process. In one way of looking at black box arguments, there is nothing fundamentally new for the argumentation theorist: A black box argument is very like any other (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  9.  5
    Digital Tools in the Informed Consent Process: A Systematic Review.Francesco Gesualdo, Margherita Daverio, Laura Palazzani, Dimitris Dimitriou, Javier Diez-Domingo, Jaime Fons-Martinez, Sally Jackson, Pascal Vignally, Caterina Rizzo & Alberto Eugenio Tozzi - 2021 - BMC Medical Ethics 22 (1):1-10.
    Background Providing understandable information to patients is necessary to achieve the aims of the Informed Consent process: respecting and promoting patients’ autonomy and protecting patients from harm. In recent decades, new, primarily digital technologies have been used to apply and test innovative formats of Informed Consent. We conducted a systematic review to explore the impact of using digital tools for Informed Consent in both clinical research and in clinical practice. Understanding, satisfaction and participation were compared for digital tools versus the (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  10. Argumentation.Scott Jacobs, Sally Jackson, Frans Eemeren & Frans H. van Eemeren - 2015 - In Scott Jacobs, Sally Jackson, Frans Eemeren & Frans H. van Eemeren (eds.), Reasonableness and Effectiveness in Argumentative Discourse. Springer Verlag.
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  11.  23
    Comments on 'Strategic Maneuvering in Mathematical Proofs'.Sally Jackson - 2008 - Argumentation 22 (3):469-472.
    “Black box argument” is a metaphor for modular components of argumentative discussion that are, within a particular discussion, not open to expansion. In public policy debate such as the controversy over abstinence-only sex education, scientific conclusions enter the discourse as black boxes consisting of a result returned from an external and largely impenetrable process. In one way of looking at black box arguments, there is nothing fundamentally new for the argumentation theorist: A black box argument is very like any other (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  12.  15
    Frans H. Van Eemeren and Wu Peng : Contextualizing Pragma-Dialectics: John Benjamins, Amsterdam/Philadelphia, 2017. Volume 12 of the Argumentation in Context Series, Ix, 367 Pp, ISBN: 9789027211293 , €99.00, ISBN: 9789027264800 , €99.00.Sally Jackson - 2018 - Argumentation 32 (2):293-299.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  13. Modeling the Invention of a New Inference Rule: The Case of ‘Randomized Clinical Trial’ as an Argument Scheme for Medical Science.Jodi Schneider & Sally Jackson - 2018 - Argument and Computation 9 (2):77-89.
    A background assumption of this paper is that the repertoire of inference schemes available to humanity is not fixed, but subject to change as new schemes are invented or refined and as old ones are obsolesced or abandoned. This is particularly visible in areas like health and environmental sciences, where enormous societal investment has been made in finding ways to reach more dependable conclusions. Computational modeling of argumentation, at least for the discourse in expert fields, will require the possibility of (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark