Results found: 2

Search results

Sort By:

Limit search:

BUILDING BRIDGES BETWEEN EVERYDAY ARGUMENT AND FORMAL REPRESENTATIONS OF REASONING

100%

Debowska K., Lozinski P., Reed C.

Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric

2009

issue 16(29)

95-135

Argumentation theory, as a subdiscipline of philosophy, concentrates on the human expression of reasoning. It is an ancient area of research which has been enjoying a renaissance over the past thirty years or so with the development of two distinct theoretical branches: informal logic and pragma-dialectics. Both of these areas have influenced the development of mathematical and computational models of arguments that since the mid 90's has seen an explosion in research interest and output: with the area currently supporting two annual workshop series, a biennial conference series, a slew of journal special issues and, from 2010, its own dedicated journal. The links between the philosophical and formal ends of argumentation research, however, have been relatively sparse and ad hoc. This paper aims to build a bridge between the two areas that supports a more rigorous and extensive exchange of ideas and results to the benefit of both fields.

A Critical Discussion Game for Prohibiting Fallacies

100%

Visser J., Budzynska K., Reed C.

Logic and Logical Philosophy

2018

vol. 27

issue 4 Special Issue on Logic, Cognition, Argumentation. Guest Editors: Mariusz Urbański, Michiel van Lambalgen and Marcin Koszowy

491-515

The study of fallacies is at the heart of argumentation studies. In response to Hamblin’s devastating critique of the state of the theory of fallacies in 1970, both formal dialectical and informal approaches to fallacies developed. In the current paper, we focus on an influential informal approach to fallacies, part of the pragma-dialectical theory of argumentation. Central to the pragma-dialectical method for analysing and evaluating argumentative discourse is the ideal model of a critical discussion. In this discussion model, a dialectical perspective on argumentation is combined with a pragmatic take on communicative interaction. By formalising and computationally implementing the model of a critical discussion, we take a first step in the development of software to computationally model argumentative dialogue in which fallacies are prohibited along the pragmadialectical norms. We do this by defining the Critical Discussion Game, a formal dialogue game based on the pragma-dialectical discussion model, executable on an online user-interface which is part of a larger infrastructure of argumentation software.

Refine search results

1 Logic and Logical Philosophy

1 Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric

2 Reed C.

1 Budzynska K.

1 Debowska K.

1 Lozinski P.

1 Visser J.

1 2018

1 2009

Search results

BUILDING BRIDGES BETWEEN EVERYDAY ARGUMENT AND FORMAL REPRESENTATIONS OF REASONING

A Critical Discussion Game for Prohibiting Fallacies