Since the late 1950s the study of argumentation has developed from a marginal part of logic and rhetoric into a genuine interdisciplinary academic discipline. After having first been primarily concerned with creating an adequate philosophical perspective on argumentation, argumentation theorists have gradually shifted their focus of attention to a more immediate concern with the ins and outs of argumentative praxis. What exactly are the characteristics of situated argumentative discourse in different argumentative 'action types'? How is the discourse influenced by institutional and contextual constraints? In what way can prominent cases of argumentative discourse be fruitfully analysed? Argumentation in Practice aims to provide insight into some important facets of argumentative praxis and the different ways in which it can be approached. The first part of this volume, 'Conceptions of problems in argumentative practice', introduces useful theoretical perspectives. The second part, 'Empirical studies of argumentative practice', contains both empirical studies of a general kind and several types of specific case studies.
Recent concerns with the evaluation of argumentation in informal logic and speech communication center around nondemonstrative arguments that lead to tentative or defeasible conclusions based on a balance of considerations. Such arguments do not appear to have structures of the kind traditionally identified with deductive and inductive reasoning, but are extremely common and are often called "plausible" or "presumptive," meaning that they are only provisionally acceptable even when they are correct. How is one to judge, by some clearly defined standard, whether such arguments are correct or not in a given instance? The answer lies in what are called argumentation schemes -- forms of argument (structures of inference) that enable one to identify and evaluate common types of argumentation in everyday discourse. This book identifies 25 argumentation schemes for presumptive reasoning and matches a set of critical questions to each. These two elements -- the scheme and the questions -- are then used to evaluate a given argument in a particular case in relation to a context of dialogue in which the argument occurred. In recent writings on argumentation, there is a good deal of stress placed on how important argumentation schemes are in any attempt to evaluate common arguments in everyday reasoning as correct or fallacious, acceptable or questionable. However, the problem is that the literature thus far has not produced a precise and user-friendly enough analysis of the structures of the argumentation schemes themselves, nor have any of the documented accounts been as helpful, accessible, or systematic as they could be, especially in relation to presumptive reasoning. This book solves the problem by presenting the most common presumptive schemes in an orderly and clear way that makes them explicit and useful as precisely defined structures. As such, it will be an indispensable tool for researchers, students, and teachers in the areas of critical thinking, argumentation, speech communication, informal logic, and discourse analysis.
Use of argumentation methods applied to legal reasoning is a relatively new field of study. The book provides a survey of the leading problems, and outlines how future research using argumentation-based methods show great promise of leading to useful solutions. The problems studied include not only these of argument evaluation and argument invention, but also analysis of specific kinds of evidence commonly used in law, like witness testimony, circumstantial evidence, forensic evidence and character evidence. New tools for analyzing these kinds of evidence are introduced.
Educational researchers are bound to see this as a timely work. It brings together the work of leading experts in argumentation in science education. It presents research combining theoretical and empirical perspectives relevant for secondary science classrooms. Since the 1990s, argumentation studies have increased at a rapid pace, from stray papers to a wealth of research exploring ever more sophisticated issues. It is this fact that makes this volume so crucial.
During the last decade, argumentation has attracted growing attention as a means to elicit processes (linguistic, logical, dialogical, psychological, etc.) that can sustain or provoke reasoning and learning. Constituting an important dimension of daily life and of professional activities, argumentation plays a special role in democracies and is at the heart of philosophical reasoning and scientific inquiry. Argumentation, as such, requires specific intellectual and social skills. Hence, argumentation will have an increasing importance in education, both because it is a critical competence that has to be learned, and because argumentation can be used to foster learning in philosophy, history, sciences and in many other domains. Argumentation and Education answers these and other questions by providing both theoretical backgrounds, in psychology, education and theory of argumentation, and concrete examples of experiments and results in school contexts in a range of domains. It reports on existing innovative practices in education settings at various levels.
Crucial Concepts in Argumentation Theory is a collection of essays that discuss a series of important issues in the study of argumentation. The essays describe the concepts that are crucial to argumentational research and the various ways these concepts have been approached. The essays explore such issues as points of view, unexpressed premises, argument schemes, argumentation structures, fallacies, argument interpretation and reconstruction, and argumentation in law. Each of the essays provides interested readers with an overview of the literature that can serve as a point of departure for further study.
Bridging the gap between applied ethics and ethical theory, Ethical Argumentation draws on recent research in argumentation theory to develop a more realistic model of how ethical justification actually works. Douglas Walton presents a new model of ethical argumentation in which ethical justification is analyzed as a defeasible form of argumentation considered in a balanced dialogue. Walton's new model employs techniques such as: asking the appropriate critical questions, probing accepted values, finding nonexplicit assumptions in an ethical argument, and deconstructing emotive terms and persuasive definitions. This book will be of significant interest to scholars and advanced students in applied ethics and theory.
Argumentation is all around us. Letters to the Editor often make points of cons- tency, and “Why” is one of the most frequent questions in language, asking for r- sons behind behaviour. And argumentation is more than ‘reasoning’ in the recesses of single minds, since it crucially involves interaction. It cements the coordinated social behaviour that has allowed us, in small bands of not particularly physically impressive primates, to dominate the planet, from the mammoth hunt all the way up to organized science. This volume puts argumentation on the map in the eld of Arti cial Intelligence. This theme has been coming for a while, and some famous pioneers are chapter authors, but we can now see a broader systematic area emerging in the sum of topics and results. As a logician, I nd this intriguing, since I see AI as ‘logic continued by other means’, reminding us of broader views of what my discipline is about. Logic arose originally out of re ection on many-agent practices of disputation, in Greek Ant- uity, but also in India and China. And logicians like me would like to return to this broader agenda of rational agency and intelligent interaction. Of course, Aristotle also gave us a formal systems methodology that deeply in uenced the eld, and eventually connected up happily with mathematical proof and foundations.
This book constitutes the thoroughly refereed proceedings of the 6th International Workshop on Argumentation in Multi-Agent Systems, held in Budapest, Hungary, in May 2009, in association with the 8th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems (AAMAS 2009). The 18 revised full papers were carefully reviewed and selected from numerous submissions and are organized in four topical sections on practical reasoning and argument about action; persuasion and negotiation; argumentation theory; and applications and emotions.
Pondering on Problems of Argumentation is a collection of twenty essays brought together for anyone who is interested in theoretical issues in the study of argumentation. This collection of papers gives the reader an insightful and balanced view of the kind of theoretical issues argumentation theorists are currently concerned with. Because most of the perspectives on argumentation that are en vogue are represented, this volume provides a multidisciplinary and even interdisciplinary outlook on the current state of affairs in argumentation theory. Some of the contributions in Pondering on Problems of Argumentation deal with problems of argumentation that have been recognized as theoretical issues for a considerable time, like the problems of fallaciousness and identifying argumentation structures. Other contributions discuss issues that have become a focus of attention only recently or regained their prominence, such as the relationship between dialectic and rhetoric, and the strategic use of the argumentative technique of dissociation. In five separate sections papers are included dealing with argumentative strategies, problems of norms of reasonableness and fallaciousness, types of argument and argument schemes the structure of argumentation and rules for advocacy and discussion.
Publisher: Imprensa da Universidade de Coimbra / Coimbra University Press
This book is the edition of the Proceedings of the International Colloquium “Rhetoric and Argumentation in the Beginning of the XXIst Century” which was held at the Faculty of Letters of the University of Coimbra, in October 2-4, 2008, and was organized by Henrique Jales Ribeiro, Joaquim Neves Vicente and Rui Alexandre Grácio. The main purpose of the Colloquium was to commemorate the publication in 1958 of the books La nouvelle rhétorique: Traité de l’argumentation, and The Uses of Arguments, by, respectively, C. Perelman/L. Olbrechts-Tyteca, and S. Toulmin. But another important goal was to take stock of the state of rhetoric and argumentation theory at the beginning of a new century. It was a unique event, without parallel in Portugal and worldwide - considering its theme and its aims -, which gathered some of the World’s most renowned rhetoric and argumentation theorists: Alan Gross, Douglas Walton, Erik Krabbe, Frans V. Eemeren, F. Snoeck Henkemans, Guy Haarscher, John Anthony Blair, Marianne Doury, Oswald Ducrot, Ruth Amossy. The book includes a variety of very important contributions to rhetoric and argumentation theory, ranging from those that naturally fall within the subject matter, to the areas of philosophy, linguistics, communication theory, education theory and law theory. The “art”, as it was called in the Medieval curricula, is no longer a discipline amongst others and has became, according to the view of some specialists and largely owing to Perelman and Toulmin influences, a “new paradigm” of rationality for our age, which auspiciously encompasses all fields of knowledge and culture. The book is divided into five parts: I- Historical and philosophical studies on the influences of Perelman and Toulmin; II- Studies in argumentation theory; III- Linguistic approaches to argumentation theory; IV- Rhetoric; and communication theory / education theory approaches to argumentation; and V- Law theory approaches to argumentation.
A leading expert in informal logic, Douglas Walton turns his attention in this new book to how reasoning operates in trials and other legal contexts, with special emphasis on the law of evidence. The new model he develops, drawing on methods of argumentation theory that are gaining wide acceptance in computing fields like artificial intelligence, can be used to identify, analyze, and evaluate specific types of legal argument. In contrast with approaches that rely on deductive and inductive logic and rule out many common types of argument as fallacious, Walton&’s aim is to provide a more expansive view of what can be considered &"reasonable&" in legal argument when it is construed as a dynamic, rule-governed, and goal-directed conversation. This dialogical model gives new meaning to the key notions of relevance and probative weight, with the latter analyzed in terms of pragmatic criteria for what constitutes plausible evidence rather than truth.
Language Arts & Disciplines by Christopher W. Tindale
The study of argumentation has primarily focused on logical and dialectical approaches, with minimal attention given to the rhetorical facets of argument. Rhetorical Argumentation: Principles of Theory and Practice approaches argumentation from a rhetorical point of view and demonstrates how logical and dialectical considerations depend on the rhetorical features of the argumentative situation. Throughout this text, author Christopher W. Tindale identifies how argumentation as a communicative practice can best be understood by its rhetorical features.
Fundamentals of Critical Argumentation presents the basic tools for the identification, analysis, and evaluation of common arguments for beginners. The book teaches by using examples of arguments in dialogues, both in the text itself and in the exercises. Examples of controversial legal, political, and ethical arguments are analyzed. Illustrating the most common kinds of arguments, the book also explains how to analyze and evaluate each kind by critical questioning. Douglas Walton shows how arguments can be reasonable under the right dialogue conditions by using critical questions to evaluate them.
Language Arts & Disciplines by Frans H. van Eemeren
"Examining Argumentation in Context: Fifteen studies on strategic maneuvering "contains a selection of papers on strategic maneuvering in argumentative discourse. Starting point of all of these contributions is that a satisfactory analysis and evaluation of strategic maneuvering is possible only if the argumentative discourse is first situated in the communicative and interactional context in which it occurs. While some of the contributions present general views with regard to strategic maneuvering, other contributions report on the results of empirical studies, examine strategic maneuvering in a particular legal or political context, or highlight the presentational design of strategic maneuvering. "Examining Argumentation in Context" therefore provides an insightful" "view of recent developments in the research on strategic maneuvering, which is currently prominent in the study of argumentation.
Wayne Brockriede's contribution to studies of argumentation continues to influence contemporary research. Perspectives on Argumentation identifies the pertinent theories and contemporary applications on which students can build their own skills of reasoning and can understand the argument practices of others. Book jacket.
Here are the latest developments in the growing area of research at the interface of argumentation theory and multiagent systems. Argumentation provides tools for designing, implementing and analyzing sophisticated forms of interaction among rational agents.