Relevant bibliographies by topics / Dialectical argumentation

Contents

  1. Journal articles
  2. Dissertations / Theses
  3. Books
  4. Book chapters
  5. Conference papers

Academic literature on the topic 'Dialectical argumentation'

Author: Grafiati
Published: 18 May 2024

Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles

Select a source type:

Consult the lists of relevant articles, books, theses, conference reports, and other scholarly sources on the topic 'Dialectical argumentation.'

Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.

You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.

Journal articles on the topic "Dialectical argumentation"

1

Kaldjärv, Merle. "PRAGMA-DIALECTICS ON THE BASIS OF STATE EXAMINATION COMPOSITIONS." Problems of Education in the 21st Century 38, no. 1 (December 20, 2011): 37–49. http://dx.doi.org/10.33225/pec/11.38.37.

Full text
Abstract:
The present research is based on a study analysing the argumentative skills of Estonian gymnasium students in state examination compositions. The aim of the study is to establish the choices made by students while writing their state exam composition as an argumentative text type. The research considers the implementation of the stages of critical discussion of the pragma-dialectical theory by F. van Eemeren and R. Grootendorst on the basis of one state examination composition (2006, code 356047). In establishing the structure of argumentation in compositions, the macrostructures by T.A. van Dijk were employed as these allow highlighting the macro speech acts expressing more complex speech acts. The stages of critical discussion of the pragma-dialectical argumentation theory could be associated with the argumentation practice used in Estonia. The implementation of the pragma-dialectical theory enhances the comprehension process of argumentative texts from the pragmatical and dialectical point of view. Key words: argumentation, dialogue, Estonian language, pragmatics, stages of critical discussion.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
2

Blair, J. Anthony, and Ralph H. Johnson. "Argumentation as dialectical." Argumentation 1, no. 1 (1987): 41–56. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/bf00127118.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
3

van Eemeren, Frans H., and Peter Houtlosser. "The study of argumentation as normative pragmatics." Pragmatics and Cognition 15, no. 1 (May 11, 2007): 161–77. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/pc.15.1.11eem.

Full text
Abstract:
In the study of argumentation there is a sharp and ideological separation between dialectical and rhetorical approaches, which needs to be remedied. The authors show how the pragma-dialectical theory of argumentation can be instrumental in bridging the gap. By adopting a research programme that involves engaging in ‘normative pragmatics’, not only the critical normative and the empirical descriptive dimensions of the study of argumentation can be brought together, but also the dialectical and the rhetorical perspectives. In the research programme, which includes philosophical, theoretical, analytical, empirical and practical components, dialectical and rhetorical perspectives are articulated in each component. The authors make clear that the two perspectives can be reconciled with the help of the notion of ‘strategic manoeuvring’. Strategic manoeuvring, which is inherent in argumentative discourse, is aimed at reconciling the simultaneous pursuit of dialectical and rhetorical aims.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
4

Macagno, Fabrizio. "Dialectical Relevance and Dialogical Context in Walton’s Pragmatic Theory." Informal Logic 28, no. 2 (June 5, 2008): 102. http://dx.doi.org/10.22329/il.v28i2.542.

Full text
Abstract:
The notions of types of dialogue and dialectical relevance are central themes in Walton’s work and the grounds for a dialectical approach to many fallacies. After outlining the dialogue models constituting the background of Walton’s account, this article presents the concepts of dialectical relevance and dialogue shifts in their application to biased argumentation, fallacious moves, and illicit argumentative strategies. Showing the different dialectical proposals Walton advanced in several studies on argumentation as a development of a dialogical system, it has proved possible to highlight the fundamental aspects of his theory in a comprehensive model of communication and interaction.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
5

STRANIERI, ANDREW, JOHN ZELEZNIKOW, and JOHN YEARWOOD. "Argumentation structures that integrate dialectical and non-dialectical reasoning." Knowledge Engineering Review 16, no. 4 (December 2001): 331–48. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0269888901000248.

Full text
Abstract:
Argumentation concepts have been applied to numerous knowledge engineering endeavours in recent years. For example, a variety of logics have been developed to represent argumentation in the context of a dialectical situation such as a dialogue. In contrast to the dialectical approach, argumentation has also been used to structure knowledge. This can be seen as a non-dialectical approach. The Toulmin argument structure has often been used to structure knowledge non-dialectically yet most studies that apply the Toulmin structure do not use the original structure but vary one or more components. Variations to the Toulmin structure can be understood as different ways to integrate a dialectical perspective with a non-dialectical one. Drawing the dialectical/non-dialectical distinction enables the specification of a framework called the generic actual argument model that is expressly non-dialectical. The framework enables the development of knowledge-based systems that integrate a variety of inference procedures, combine information retrieval with reasoning and facilitate automated document drafting. Furthermore, the non-dialectical framework provides the foundation for simple dialectical models. Systems based on our approach have been developed in family law, refugee law, determining eligibility for government legal aid, copyright law and e-tourism.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
6

Linqiong, Yan. "A pragma-dialectical approach to governmental crisis communication." Argumentative Discourse in Contemporary China 6, no. 3 (December 4, 2017): 315–43. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/jaic.17003.yan.

Full text
Abstract:
Abstract To explore an argumentative approach to governmental crisis communication, this research adopts the pragma-dialectical framework to analyze and evaluate a local Chinese government’s crisis discourse concerning disputes over a proposed chemical project. The discourse is collected from the popular local online forum Mengxi Forum. By reconstructing from the discourse the four stages of a critical discussion, analyzing the embedded strategic maneuverings and evaluating the argumentation in view of institutional preconditions, it is shown that in its use of co-ordinative argumentation structures and causal argument schemes, the local government’s crisis discourse is not dialectically reasonable enough to convince the other stakeholders of the necessity to implement the proposed project. The results also shed some light on the necessity for governments’ crisis information management to ensure in its crisis discourse both dialectical reasonableness and rhetorical effectiveness.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
7

Kamariah, Kamariah, Kisyani Laksono, and Agusniar Dian Savitri. "Potential Topics as Discourse Shapers Argumentation The Forum Holds a Talk With the Theme of the Covid-19 Pandemic: Pragma-dialectical Studies." International Journal Of Education, Social Studies, And Management (IJESSM) 3, no. 1 (February 7, 2023): 28–48. http://dx.doi.org/10.52121/ijessm.v3i1.131.

Full text
Abstract:
The purpose of writing this article is to find potential topics with dialectical objectives and potential topics with rhetorical objectives as argumentation makers at each stage of critical discussion at the COVID-19-themed talk forum. The method used is descriptive qualitative with data analysis techniques emphasizing pragma-dialectical studies focusing on argumentative discourse. Data analysis techniques emphasize pragma-dialectical studies focusing on argumentative discourse. The results showed that potential topics with dialectical and rhetorical functions were found at each stage of the argumentation. Each function found has a different role as an argumentative. Potential topics with an analytic function in the confrontation stage are used to explain the issues discussed. The opening stage ensures that disputes exist and are unambiguous. At the argumentation stage, it is used to test the acceptance of a descriptive, evaluative, or prescriptive point of view. The closing stage ensures that everything that has been said is concluded with sufficient evidence. At the same time, the potential topics with a rhetorical function in the confrontation stage are used to ensure that the issues in the discussion degree are helpful. In the opening stage, it is used to select arguments that do not involve the burden of proof. At the argumentation stage, it is used to apply persuasion tools that will make someone win the argument. The closing stage is used to ensure the argument ends.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
8

Dudash, Tamara. "Dialectical Approach to Legal Arguing and Legal Argumentation." Philosophy of law and general theory of law, no. 2 (December 22, 2021): 145–65. http://dx.doi.org/10.21564/2707-7039.2.242855.

Full text
Abstract:
The article is devoted to legal argumentation, namely to its research by dialectical approach. The aim of the article is to determine characteristic features of dialectical approach to legal argumentation. Dialectical approach to the research of legal argumentation should include philosophical, theoretical, empirical components. Philosophical component of legal argumentation research consists in the critical conception of rationality i.e. the philosophical axiomatic idea about rationality of legal argumentation, which is systematically tested within discourse or critical discussion. Dialectical theoretical model of legal argumentation ensures mutual acceptability of legal argumentation by the parties. Dialectical approach deals with legal argumentation mainly in the “context of justification.” Dialectical approach to legal arguing implies specific standard of soundness of the argumentation – acceptability standard. Empirical component of legal argumentation includes reconstruction of argumentation and its weighting (analytic component) as well as analysis of particular legal reasoning (practical component). Dialectical approach highlights hermeneutical nature of legal reasoning. Dialectical approach to legal argumentation lets us assume some ontological issues concerning legal argumentation. Legal argumentation is considered as the form of rational communication of particular persons to reach mutual acceptability of legally important conclusions within the procedure of discussion. Legal argumentation is the result of such impact embodied in acceptability of legally binding issues within the procedure of rational discussion.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
9

Bletsas, Marina. "Paroemiological argumentation in Italian and French journalistic discourse." Journal of Argumentation in Context 11, no. 2 (October 6, 2022): 180–99. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/jaic.21003.ble.

Full text
Abstract:
Abstract Proverbs are often used in argumentation to convey an epistemic or deontic point of view. While their argumentative potential has not failed to gain the attention of linguists, much remains to be done in terms of analyzing their pragmatic function in single argumentative contexts and languages. With a view to this desideratum, and embracing a contrastive perspective, I pose the question of the argumentative role of proverbs in Italian and French journalistic discourse. In a pragma-dialectical framework, I take the rhetorical perspective to pertain to argumentation as much as the dialectical one and show the potential of proverbs in both spheres. However, I then focus mainly the former perspective, showing how paroemiological argumentation can help mitigate the difference of opinion especially in the case of dissent and facilitate argumentative effectiveness thanks to protagonist-centered and antagonist-oriented strategies involving linguistic polyphony and non-directness.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
10

Garssen, Bart. "Une réaction à la critique depuis les marges épistémologiques." Informal Logic 43, no. 4 (January 21, 2024): 527–42. http://dx.doi.org/10.22329/il.v43i4.8415.

Full text
Abstract:
In this paper, a reaction is presented to Siegel’s claim that the pragma-dialectical theory of argumentation ignores or neglects epistemological viewpoints that he finds vital to any normative theory of argumentation. The focus is on the most important problems in Siegel’s argument: 1) the ambiguity of the term ‘argument’ and the alleged negligence of this ambiguity in pragma-dialectics; 2) the critical rational perspective of the pragma-dialectical account; and 3) the alleged negligence of the “abstract propositional sense” of argument in pragma-dialectics.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
More sources

Dissertations / Theses on the topic "Dialectical argumentation"

1

Zsembery, Celeste Lloyd. "Rhetoric in Dialectical Behavior Therapy: Healing Minds Through Argumentation." BYU ScholarsArchive, 2012. https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/etd/3093.

Full text
Abstract:
The fields of psychology and rhetoric share the goal of improving human mental health and behavior through persuasion. This thesis traces the history of rhetoric and psychology theory, focusing on the parallel theories of Nienkamp's internal rhetoric and Herman's dialogical self. Both theories model the human mind as having multiple psyches that actively interact to interpret human experience and project human behavior. I conclude with a case study of anorexic patients using ethos, pathos, and logos in dialectical behavior therapy (DBT), arguing that principles of rhetoric can help patients with mental disorders cognitively realign their thinking more effectively than drug treatments can.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
2

Strass, Hannes. "Approximating Operators and Semantics for Abstract Dialectical Frameworks." Universitätsbibliothek Leipzig, 2013. http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bsz:15-qucosa-102943.

Full text
Abstract:
We provide a systematic in-depth study of the semantics of abstract dialectical frameworks (ADFs), a recent generalisation of Dung\'s abstract argumentation frameworks. This is done by associating with an ADF its characteristic one-step consequence operator and defining various semantics for ADFs as different fixpoints of this operator. We first show that several existing semantical notions are faithfully captured by our definition, then proceed to define new ADF semantics and show that they are proper generalisations of existing argumentation semantics from the literature. Most remarkably, this operator-based approach allows us to compare ADFs to related nonmonotonic formalisms like Dung argumentation frameworks and propositional logic programs. We use polynomial, faithful and modular translations to relate the formalisms, and our results show that both abstract argumentation frameworks and abstract dialectical frameworks are at most as expressive as propositional normal logic programs.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
3

Al-Rikabi, A. A. "A revised pragma-dialectical approach to political argumentation in the media." Thesis, University of Salford, 2018. http://usir.salford.ac.uk/47928/.

Full text
Abstract:
This thesis critically reviews the pragma-dialectical approach to the study of argumentation advanced by van Eemeren and Grootendorst (1984, 1988, 1992, 2003, 2004) and puts forward a modified version of this framework to provide a better analysis of the special features of political argumentation. This study develops a more applicable model for the analysis and evaluation of actual argumentative discussions, which are often typical of political discourse. The revised framework proposes a number of amendments to the rules of the critical discussion model. Some new types of fallacies arising as a result of violations to these rules are also discussed. One of the main arguments put forward in this thesis is that the aim of political argumentation is not restricted to resolving differences of opinion, and that the role of the audience is critical to understanding political argumentative discourse. The thesis also explores the ways in which violations of the rules of the critical discussion can affect the process of argumentation, and whether such violations always lead to fallacies being committed. The thesis considers the true aims of political argumentation and develops a modified version of the pragma-dialectal framework consisting of a general principle and just seven discussion rules, which takes into account a new conception of the notions of argumentation and fallacy.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
4

Hietanen, Mika. "Paul's argumentation in Galatians : a pragma-dialectical analysis of Gal. 3.1-5.12 /." Helsinki : Åbo Akademi, 2005. http://catalogue.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/cb40980911t.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
5

Ouerdane, Wassila. "Multiple criteria decision aiding : a dialectical perspective." Paris 9, 2009. https://bu.dauphine.psl.eu/fileviewer/index.php?doc=2009PA090075.

Full text
Abstract:
Nous proposons dans cette thèse d'intégrer les concepts et les outils de la théorie de l'argumentation dans un processus d'aide à la décision : une interaction entre un expert et un décideur, avec pour principal objectif est d'arriver à un consensus. Notre ambition à travers ce travail est double : (i) renforcer les capacité d’aide à la décision d’un expert en lui offrant un moyen formel pour représenter de façon explicite et transparente les raisons pour lesquelles il recommande (ou non) une solution (le cas échéant), et (ii) renforcer les capacités d’un outil (semi) automatique pour lui permettre de gérer le dialogue avec un décideur, dans le but de l’aider à résoudre son problème de décision. Dans la première partie de notre travail, nous proposons de combler l’absence d’explications formelles durant un processus d’évaluation multicritère, en construisons une structure hiérarchique de trois niveaux de schémas d’argument. Ces schémas vont permettre de représenter de façon explicite et claire les hypothèses de chaque étape du processus. Dans la second partie, nous souhaitons montrer que l'utilisation des outils de l'argumentation, tel que la fonction d'acceptabilité, les questions critiques, vont permettre de faciliter le processus de révision et/ou de mise à jour durant l’évaluation multicritère. Pour cela, nous proposons de construire un système qui va permettre, entre autres, (i) de présenter une recommandation qui peut être explicitement justifiée, (ii) de réviser n'importe quelle étape du raisonnement durant le processus et d'informer des conséquences des évolutions en utilisant, par exemple, une représentation graphiques des arguments échanges
We propose in this thesis to adopt tools and concepts of argumentation theory in a decision aiding process: an interaction between, at least, an expert and a decision maker, where the main objective of this process is to reach a consensus between the two participants. Our ambitions through this work is twofold: (i) enhance decision support capabilities of the analyst representing explicitly and accountably the reasons for which he recommend (or not) a solution (if any); and (ii) Enhance decision support capabilities of an (semi) automatic device to handle (at least partially) the dialogue with the user. Thus, first, we propose to specify in an argumentative terms the steps involved in a multiple criteria evaluation process, a phase of the decision aiding process. To do that, we construct a hierarchical structure where we identify three levels of argument schemes that are embedded. The objective is to make explicit assumptions that are hidden in such a process, hence allowing meaningful explanations. Second, we propose to show that by relying on tools of argumentation such as acceptability function, critical questions, we facilitate the revision/update occurring during such a process. To do that, we initiate a systematic study which aims at constituting a significant step forward for forthcoming decision-aiding tools. The kind of system that we foresee here would allow, among others,: (i) to present a recommendation that can be explicitly justified; (ii) to revise any piece of reasoning involved in this process, and to inform of the consequences of such moves by presenting, for instance, graphically the exchanged arguments
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
6

Straß, Hannes, and Johannes Peter Wallner. "Analyzing the Computational Complexity of Abstract Dialectical Frameworks via Approximation Fixpoint Theory." Universitätsbibliothek Leipzig, 2014. http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bsz:15-qucosa-129614.

Full text
Abstract:
Abstract dialectical frameworks (ADFs) have recently been proposed as a versatile generalization of Dung's abstract argumentation frameworks (AFs). In this paper, we present a comprehensive analysis of the computational complexity of ADFs. Our results show that while ADFs are one level up in the polynomial hierarchy compared to AFs, there is a useful subclass of ADFs which is as complex as AFs while arguably offering more modeling capacities. As a technical vehicle, we employ the approximation fixpoint theory of Denecker, Marek and Truszczyński, thus showing that it is also a useful tool for complexity analysis of operator-based semantics.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
7

Bortoletto, Adriana [UNESP]. "Temas sociocientíficos: análise dos processos argumentativos no contexto escolar." Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP), 2009. http://hdl.handle.net/11449/90948.

Full text
Abstract:
Made available in DSpace on 2014-06-11T19:24:50Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0 Previous issue date: 2009-10-26Bitstream added on 2014-06-13T19:52:38Z : No. of bitstreams: 1 bortoletto_a_me_bauru.pdf: 959851 bytes, checksum: b7bd2e7d9211d2ed4842418dfa06c291 (MD5)
Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES)
O objetivo do presente trabalho foi explorar e analisar o engajamento discursivo, assim como as concepções de ciência, tecnologia, sociedade e ambiente, de alunos de um curso técnico durante os processos argumentativos em sala de aula. Para realização da proposta foi necessária a elaboração de um minicurso intitulado de Eficiência Energética. o material didático era composto por vídeos, textos da área e situações problemas, os quais envolviam as dimensões científica, social, política, tecnológica e ambiental. Para a análise dos dados utilizou-se da abordagem metodológica da pragmadialética e com base nessa perspectiva buscou-se analisar os atos de fala de cada participante, como estes interagiam um para com o outro, os pontos de vista defendidos individualmente, assim como as justificativas desenvolvidas em cada um destes e os estágios pelo qual a discussão passou. Neste contexto, percebemos indícios de redução da socialização comunicativa e, por conseguinte do engajamento discursivo. Esse interesse estratégico já denuncia que não houve uma simetria de oportunidade de falas. Outro ponto importante a ser observado é o contexto superficial de perfuntas e respostas e que, mesmo com as tentativas de incentivar a tematização dos seus atos de falas essas recaem em teorizações estratégicas de um ou mais alunos. Ao concebermos que uso da linguagem possui um ato intencional, em determinado contexto, o protagonista necessita entender que possui um compromisso público ao uso, e compreender que há necessidade de se relacionar com as pessoas daquele contexto. De fato, esses fundamentos são princípios básicos das interações sociais entre os indivíduos. Quanto às relações CTSA os alunos reconhecem o impacto que os artefatos tecnológicos podem provocar, na sociedade, perdas nas tradições culturais, na criatividade, além do banimento das interações sociais
The objective of this study was to explore and analyze the discursive engagement of students in a technical course in the argumentative process in the classroom. For realization of the proposal was necessary to prepare a mini-course on Energy Efficiency. The material consisted of vídeos, texts of the area problems and situations, which envolved the dimensions scientific, economic, social, political, environmental and technology. For data analysis was used to approch the pragma-dialetical perspective and based on that sought to examine the acts of speech of each participant as they interact with one another, the views held by each, thus as justifictions developed by each of the stages and for which the discussion started. In this context, we observe evidence of reduced communicative socialization and therefore discursive engagement. Another important point to note is the superficial context of questions and answers, and that even with attempts to promote explanations about the themes, their speech acts fall into one or more strategic actions of students. The strategic interest already complained that there wasn't symmetry of opportunities to talk. We understand that language use has an intentional act, in certain contexts, the protagonist needs to understand that has a public commitment to use, and understand that there is a need to relate to people in that context. In fact, these fundamentals are basic principles of social interactions among individuals. About CTSA relations students recognize the impact that technological artifacts may result in society, losses in cultural traditions, creativity, and the banishment of social interactions
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
8

Bortoletto, Adriana. "Temas sociocientíficos : análise dos processos argumentativos no contexto escolar /." Bauru : [s.n.], 2009. http://hdl.handle.net/11449/90948.

Full text
Abstract:
Orientador: Washington Luiz Pacheco de Carvalho
Banca: Carmen Roselaine Farias
Banca: Jair Lopes Junior
Resumo: O objetivo do presente trabalho foi explorar e analisar o engajamento discursivo, assim como as concepções de ciência, tecnologia, sociedade e ambiente, de alunos de um curso técnico durante os processos argumentativos em sala de aula. Para realização da proposta foi necessária a elaboração de um minicurso intitulado de Eficiência Energética. o material didático era composto por vídeos, textos da área e situações problemas, os quais envolviam as dimensões científica, social, política, tecnológica e ambiental. Para a análise dos dados utilizou-se da abordagem metodológica da pragmadialética e com base nessa perspectiva buscou-se analisar os atos de fala de cada participante, como estes interagiam um para com o outro, os pontos de vista defendidos individualmente, assim como as justificativas desenvolvidas em cada um destes e os estágios pelo qual a discussão passou. Neste contexto, percebemos indícios de redução da socialização comunicativa e, por conseguinte do engajamento discursivo. Esse interesse estratégico já denuncia que não houve uma simetria de oportunidade de falas. Outro ponto importante a ser observado é o contexto superficial de perfuntas e respostas e que, mesmo com as tentativas de incentivar a tematização dos seus atos de falas essas recaem em teorizações estratégicas de um ou mais alunos. Ao concebermos que uso da linguagem possui um ato intencional, em determinado contexto, o protagonista necessita entender que possui um compromisso público ao uso, e compreender que há necessidade de se relacionar com as pessoas daquele contexto. De fato, esses fundamentos são princípios básicos das interações sociais entre os indivíduos. Quanto às relações CTSA os alunos reconhecem o impacto que os artefatos tecnológicos podem provocar, na sociedade, perdas nas tradições culturais, na criatividade, além do banimento das interações sociais
Abstract: The objective of this study was to explore and analyze the discursive engagement of students in a technical course in the argumentative process in the classroom. For realization of the proposal was necessary to prepare a mini-course on Energy Efficiency. The material consisted of vídeos, texts of the area problems and situations, which envolved the dimensions scientific, economic, social, political, environmental and technology. For data analysis was used to approch the pragma-dialetical perspective and based on that sought to examine the acts of speech of each participant as they interact with one another, the views held by each, thus as justifictions developed by each of the stages and for which the discussion started. In this context, we observe evidence of reduced communicative socialization and therefore discursive engagement. Another important point to note is the superficial context of questions and answers, and that even with attempts to promote explanations about the themes, their speech acts fall into one or more strategic actions of students. The strategic interest already complained that there wasn't symmetry of opportunities to talk. We understand that language use has an intentional act, in certain contexts, the protagonist needs to understand that has a public commitment to use, and understand that there is a need to relate to people in that context. In fact, these fundamentals are basic principles of social interactions among individuals. About CTSA relations students recognize the impact that technological artifacts may result in society, losses in cultural traditions, creativity, and the banishment of social interactions
Mestre
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
9

Bartocci, Barbara. "Dialectical reasoning and topical argument in the middle ages : an inquiry into the commentaries on aristotle's "topics" (1250-1500)." Electronic Thesis or Diss., Tours, 2017. http://www.theses.fr/2017TOUR2035.

Full text
Abstract:
La seule monographie consacrée à la réception des Topique d’Aristote au Moyen Age est le livre de Nigel J. Green-Pedersen, The Tradition of the Topics in the Middle Ages. The Commentaries on Aristotie ‘s and Boethius’ Topics’, publié en 1984. Les recherches sur la logique médiévale, qui ont été conduites pendant les derniers trente années, ont suggéré la nécessité d’une révision de l’analyse développé par Green-Pedersen. Cette thèse se pose comme objectif de situer les commentateurs médiévaux des Topiques d’Aristote dans leur milieu intellectuel. En prenant en considération une documentation inédite, nous avons essayé d’illustrer l’influence des différentes orientations philosophiques des commentateurs sur leurs modes d’interprétation du texte d’Aristote. Les premiers maîtres Parisiens essayèrent de dénouer des questions qui étaient issues de l’exégèse littéraire des Topiques, comme le problème concernant la forme et la matière des divers types des syllogismes, et en particulier du syllogisme dialectique. Leurs successeurs, notamment les auteurs Modiste comme Boece de Dace, Simon de Faversham et Raoul le Breton, se détachèrent de l’exégèse littéraire du texte pour envisager des questions métalogiques de caractère générale. Au milieu du XIVe siècle, Jean Buridan proposa une interprétation innovative du raisonnement dialectique, selon laquelle les raisonnements dialectiques valides comprenaient soit les arguments formellement valides que celles invalides. On retrouve l’opinion Buridanienne d’argumentation dialectique dans les commentaires du XVe siècles, qui furent produits dans les universités dominés par le nominalisme. Tandis que dans les universités d’orientation réaliste, les commentateurs des Topiques se retournaient vers les auteurs du XIlIe siècle, comme Albert le Grand. Les commentateurs Anglaises des Topiques, comme le Pseudo-Bonaventure, Jean Duns Scot et Walter Burley, développèrent leurs interprétations des Topiques en continuité avec tradition logique Britannique d’orientation terministe et de façon autonome des leurs collègues Parisiens
For anyone who intends to inquiry into the reception fo the Arisotelian Topics in the Middle Age, the inevitable starting point is the unique monography dealing with this issue, namely The Tradition of the Topics in the Middle Ages. The Commentaries on Aristotie‘s and Boethius ‘Topics’, published by Nigel Jørgen Green-Pedersen in 1984. Since the publication of this volume, scholarly research on medieval logic has shown the need to define better there suits of Green-Pedersens ‘s analysis. My PhD thesis aims at placing the commentators of the Topics in their intellectual context. Through the analysis of manuscript material, I have tried to show the bearing of authors’ diverse philosophical orientations on their approach to and reflections on the Aristotelian work. The earliest Parisian masters who commented on the Topics were concemed with issues that originated from the literaI explanation of the text, e.g. whether the various types of syllogisms had different forms or whether they differentiated only materially. Their prosecutors, namely the modistic authors Boethius of Dacia, Simon of Faversham and Radulphus Brito analysed the Topics in a different way. They paid special attention to metalogical questions, which were beyond the scope of the mere literal explication of the text. In mid-14th century, the Parisian master of art John Buridan proposed an innovative view about the proper subject of dialectic: it was dialectical argumentation, namely a probative or convincing reasoning which brought the agent an epistemic gain, although it could be formally invaiid. Buridan’s opinion about the subject matter of dialectic was adopted by 15th century masters, who taught in University that were nominalist in orientation. In those 15th century Universities in which the via antiqua provided the intellectual setting for masters and scholars, commentators of Aristotle’s Topics were influenced by 13th century commentators, such as Albert the Great. The English reception of the Aristotelian Topics was significantly diverse from the continental or Parisian tradition. The commentaries written by Pseudo-Bonaventure, John Duns Scotus and Walter Burley shared common features, which were strictly connected to terministic logic and which were not present in Parisian commentaries of the same period
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
10

Karabela, Mehmet Kadri. "The development of dialectic and argumentation theory in post-classical Islamic intellectual history." Thesis, McGill University, 2011. http://digitool.Library.McGill.CA:80/R/?func=dbin-jump-full&object_id=96696.

Full text
Abstract:
This dissertation is an analysis of the development of dialectic and argumentation theory in post-classical Islamic intellectual history. The central concerns of the thesis are; treatises on the theoretical understanding of the concept of dialectic and argumentation theory, and how, in practice, the concept of dialectic, as expressed in the Greek classical tradition, was received and used by five communities in the Islamic intellectual camp. It shows how dialectic as an argumentative discourse diffused into five communities (theologicians, poets, grammarians, philosophers and jurists) and how these local dialectics that the individual communities developed fused into a single system to form a general argumentation theory (adab al-bahth) applicable to all fields. I evaluate a treatise by Shams al-Din Samarqandi (d.702/1302), the founder of this general theory, and the treatises that were written after him as a result of his work. I concentrate specifically on work by 'Ad}ud al-Din al-Iji (d.756/1355), Sayyid Sharif al-Jurjani (d.816/1413), Taşköprüzâde (d.968/1561), Saçaklızâde (d.1150/1737) and Gelenbevî (d.1205/1791) and analyze how each writer (from Samarqandi to Gelenbevî) altered the shape of argumentative discourse and how later intellectuals in the post-classical Islamic world responded to that discourse bequeathed by their predecessors. What is striking about the period that this dissertation investigates (from 1300-1800) is the persistence of what could be called the linguistic turn in argumentation theory. After a centuries-long run, the jadal-based dialectic of the classical period was displaced by a new argumentation theory, which was dominantly linguistic in character. This linguistic turn in argumentation dates from the final quarter of the fourteenth century in Iji's impressively prescient work on 'ilm al-wad'. This idea, which finally surfaced in the post-classical period, that argumentation is about definition and that, therefore, defining is the business of language—even perhaps, that language is the only available medium for understanding and being understood—affected the way that argumentation theory was processed throughout most of the period in question.The argumentative discourse that started with Ibn al-Rawandi in the third/ninth century left a permanent imprint on Islamic intellectual history, which was then full of concepts, terminology and objectives from this discourse up until the late nineteenth century. From this perspective, Islamic intellectual history can be read as the tension between two languages: the "language of dialectic" (jadal) and the "language of demonstration" (burhan), each of which refer not only to a significant feature of that history, but also to a feature that could dramatically alter the interpretation of that history.
Cette dissertation est une analyse de l'évolution de la théorie dialectique et d'argumentation dans l'histoire intellectuelle islamique post-classique. Les préoccupations centrales de la thèse sont les suivantes: les traités sur la compréhension théorique de la notion de la théorie dialectique (de logique) et d'argumentation, et comment, en pratique, la notion dialectique, tel qu'elle est exprimée dans la tradition grecque classique, a été reçue et utilisée par les cinq collectivités du camp intellectuel islamique. Cette étude démontre comment la notion dialectique en tant que discours argumentatif a été diffusée dans cinq collectivités (théologiens, poètes, grammairiens, philosophes et juristes) et comment ces notions logiques locales, développées dans les différentes communautés, se sont fusionnées en un seul système pour former une théorie d'argumentation générale (adab al-bahth) applicable à tous les domaines.J'évalue un traité de Shams al-Din Samarqandi (d.702/1302), le fondateur de cette théorie générale, et les traités qui ont été écrits après lui en tant que succession de son travail. Je me concentre spécifiquement sur les travaux de 'Adud al-Din al-Iji (d.756/1355), Sayyid Sharif al-Jurjani (d.816/1413), Taşköprüzâde (d.968/1561), Saçaklızâde (d.1150/1737) et Gelenbevî (d.1205/1791) et analyse comment chaque auteur (de Samarqandi à Gelenbevî) a modifié la forme du discours argumentatif et comment les intellectuels, venus par après dans le monde post-islamique classique, ont répondu à ce discours transmis par leurs prédécesseurs.Ce qui est frappant, de la période que cette thèse étudie (de 1300-1800), est la persistance de ce qu'on pourrait appeler le tournant linguistique dans la théorie de l'argumentation. Après plusieurs siècles, la notion dialectique de la période classique basée sur jadal fût remplacée par une nouvelle théorie d'argumentation qui était principalement de caractère linguistique. Ce tournant linguistique dans l'argumentation est daté du dernier quart du quatorzième siècle dans le travail sur 'ilm al-wad' impressionnant et prémonitoire d'al-Iji. Cette idée, qui est finalement émergée dans la période post-classique, disant que l'argumentation décrit une définition et que, par conséquent, la définition est l'utilité du langage —et même peut-être, que le langage est le seul moyen disponible pour comprendre et être compris— a influencé la façon dont la théorie d'argumentation a été formulée dans la majeure partie de la période en question.Le discours argumentatif qui a commencé avec Ibn al-Rawandi au troisième/neuvième siècle a laissé une empreinte permanente dans l'histoire intellectuelle islamique qui s'est remplie de concepts, de terminologie et d'objectifs de ce discours jusqu'à la fin du dix-neuvième siècle. Selon cette perspective, l'histoire intellectuelle islamique peut être lue comme une divergence entre deux langues: le "langage dialectique" (jadal) et le "langage démonstratif" (burhan), dont chacun se réfère non seulement à une caractéristique importante de cette histoire, mais à une caractéristique qui pourrait changer radicalement l'interprétation de cette histoire.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
More sources

Books on the topic "Dialectical argumentation"

1

van Eemeren, Frans H. Argumentation Theory: A Pragma-Dialectical Perspective. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2018. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-95381-6.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
2

Eemeren, F. H. van. Strategic maneuvering in argumentative discourse: Extending the pragma-dialectical theory of argumentation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Pub., 2010.

Find full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
3

Strategic maneuvering in argumentative discourse: Extending the pragma-dialectical theory of argumentation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Pub., 2010.

Find full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
4

Paul's argumentation in Galatians: A pragma-dialectical analysis. London, UK: T & T Clark, 2007.

Find full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
5

R, Grootendorst, ed. Argumentation, communication, and fallacies: A pragma-dialectical perspective. Hillsdale, N.J: L. Erlbaum, 1992.

Find full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
6

R, Grootendorst, ed. A systematic theory of argumentation: The pragma-dialectical approach. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2004.

Find full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
7

Media argumentation: Dialectic, persuasion, and rhetoric. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007.

Find full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
8

van, Eemeren F. H., and Houtlosser Peter 1956-, eds. Dialectic and rhetoric: The warp and woof of argumentation analysis. Dordrecht [Netherlands]: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2002.

Find full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
9

1957-, Singh Raghwendra Pratap, ed. Reason, dialectic, and postmodern philosophy: Indian and Western perspectives. Faridabad: Om Publications, 2001.

Find full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
10

Bruce, Chilton, ed. The intellectual foundations of Christian and Jewish discourse: The philosophy of religious argument. London: Routledge, 1997.

Find full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
More sources

Book chapters on the topic "Dialectical argumentation"

1

Young, Walter Edward. "Short Dialectical Sequences and Independent Dialectical Formulae." In Logic, Argumentation & Reasoning, 379–433. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2016. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-25522-4_6.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
2

van Eemeren, Frans H., and R. Grootendorst. "Fallacies in Pragma-Dialectical Perspective." In Argumentation Library, 557–74. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2015. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-20955-5_29.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
3

Freeman, James B. "The Dialectical Nature of Argument." In Argumentation Library, 39–58. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, 2011. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0357-5_2.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
4

van Eemeren, Frans H., Bart Garssen, Erik C. W. Krabbe, A. Francisca Snoeck Henkemans, Bart Verheij, and Jean H. M. Wagemans. "Formal Dialectical Approaches." In Handbook of Argumentation Theory, 301–72. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, 2014. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-9473-5_6.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
5

van Eemeren, Frans H., Bart Garssen, Erik C. W. Krabbe, A. Francisca Snoeck Henkemans, Bart Verheij, and Jean H. M. Wagemans. "Formal Dialectical Approaches." In Handbook of Argumentation Theory, 1–62. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, 2013. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6883-3_6-1.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
6

Young, Walter Edward. "Extended Dialectical Sequences." In Logic, Argumentation & Reasoning, 217–377. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2016. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-25522-4_5.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
7

van Eemeren, Frans H., and Rob Grootendorst. "Rationale for a Pragma-Dialectical Perspective." In Argumentation Library, 203–21. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2015. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-20955-5_10.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
8

Feteris, Eveline T. "The Pragma-Dialectical Approach of Legal Argumentation." In Argumentation Library, 201–54. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, 2017. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-024-1129-4_10.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
9

van Eemeren, Frans H., Peter Houtlosser, and A. Francisca Snoeck Henkemans. "Dialectical Profiles and Indicators of Argumentative Moves." In Argumentation Library, 681–702. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2015. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-20955-5_36.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
10

van Eemeren, Frans H., Bart Garssen, and Bert Meuffels. "Effectiveness Through Reasonableness: A Pragma-Dialectical Perspective." In Argumentation Library, 773–93. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2015. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-20955-5_42.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

Conference papers on the topic "Dialectical argumentation"

1

Heyninck, Jesse, Gabriele Kern-Isberner, Tjitze Rienstra, Kenneth Skiba, and Matthias Thimm. "Revision and Conditional Inference for Abstract Dialectical Frameworks." In 18th International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning {KR-2021}. California: International Joint Conferences on Artificial Intelligence Organization, 2021. http://dx.doi.org/10.24963/kr.2021/33.

Full text
Abstract:
For propositional beliefs, there are well-established connections between belief revision, defeasible conditionals and nonmonotonic inference. In argumentative contexts, such connections have not yet been investigated. On the one hand, the exact relationship between formal argumentation and nonmonotonic inference relations is a research topic that keeps on eluding researchers despite recently intensified efforts, whereas argumentative revision has been studied in numerous works during recent years. In this paper, we show that similar relationships between belief revision, defeasible conditionals and nonmonotonic inference hold in argumentative contexts as well. We first define revision operators for abstract dialectical frameworks, and use such revision operators to define dynamic conditionals by means of the Ramsey test. We show that such conditionals can be equivalently defined using a total preorder over three-valued interpretations, and study the inferential behaviour of the resulting conditional inference relations.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
2

Arcidiacono, Francesco, and Antonio Bova. "Argumentation among Family Members in Italy and Switzerland: A Cross-Cultural Perspective." In International Association of Cross Cultural Psychology Congress. International Association for Cross-Cultural Psychology, 2013. http://dx.doi.org/10.4087/sjpx2962.

Full text
Abstract:
The main goal of this study is to analyze to what extent family members engage to resolve differences of opinion during everyday interactions at home. Our aim is to point out the importance of the context in the analytical reconstruction of argumentation carried out by parents and children at dinnertime. Trough the examination of everyday interactions, we analyze qualitatively how argumentation shapes the communicative practices of Italian and Swiss family members and how it can foster a critical attitude in their processes of decision-making. We integrate two theoretical and methodological approaches: the first one is the model of the critical discussion, derived from the pragma-dialectical perspective. It represents an ideal argumentative discussion against which real-life interaction can be analytically reconstructed and evaluated. The second one is the conversational and discursive approach that aims at identifying the sequential patterns of discourse produced by participants. The present study shows that within the setting of dinnertime conversations pragma-dialectical and conversational analyses are powerful tools to understand how argumentation fosters a critical attitude in the process of decision-making and of the building of consent. The results open a space of investigation about the management of family debates in different contexts, taking into account a double perspective on argumentation.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
3

D'Agostino, Marcello, and Sanjay Modgil. "A Study of Argumentative Characterisations of Preferred Subtheories." In Twenty-Seventh International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence {IJCAI-18}. California: International Joint Conferences on Artificial Intelligence Organization, 2018. http://dx.doi.org/10.24963/ijcai.2018/247.

Full text
Abstract:
Classical logic argumentation (Cl-Arg) under the stable semantics yields argumentative characterisations of non-monotonic inference in Preferred Subtheories. This paper studies these characterisations under both the standard approach to Cl-Arg, and a recent dialectical approach that is provably rational under resource bounds. Two key contributions are made. Firstly, the preferred extensions are shown to coincide with the stable extensions. This means that algorithms and proof theories for the admissible semantics can now be used to decide credulous inference in Preferred Subtheories. Secondly, we show that as compared with the standard approach, the grounded semantics applied to the dialectical approach more closely approximates sceptical inference in Preferred Subtheories.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
4

Keshavarzi Zafarghandi, Atefeh, Rineke Verbrugge, and Bart Verheij. "Semi-Stable Semantics for Abstract Dialectical Frameworks." In 18th International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning {KR-2021}. California: International Joint Conferences on Artificial Intelligence Organization, 2021. http://dx.doi.org/10.24963/kr.2021/40.

Full text
Abstract:
Abstract dialectical frameworks (ADFs) have been introduced as a formalism for modeling and evaluating argumentation allowing general logical satisfaction conditions. Different criteria that have been used to settle the acceptance of arguments are called semantics. However, the notion of semi-stable semantics as studied for abstract argumentation frameworks has received little attention for ADFs. In the current work, we present the concepts of semi-two-valued models and semi-stable models for ADFs. We show that these two notions satisfy a set of plausible properties required for semi-stable semantics of ADFs. Moreover, we show that semi-two-valued and semi-stable semantics of ADFs form a proper generalization of the semi-stable semantics of AFs, just like two-valued model and stable semantics for ADFs are generalizations of stable semantics for AFs.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
5

Čyras, Kristijonas, Antonio Rago, Emanuele Albini, Pietro Baroni, and Francesca Toni. "Argumentative XAI: A Survey." In Thirtieth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence {IJCAI-21}. California: International Joint Conferences on Artificial Intelligence Organization, 2021. http://dx.doi.org/10.24963/ijcai.2021/600.

Full text
Abstract:
Explainable AI (XAI) has been investigated for decades and, together with AI itself, has witnessed unprecedented growth in recent years. Among various approaches to XAI, argumentative models have been advocated in both the AI and social science literature, as their dialectical nature appears to match some basic desirable features of the explanation activity. In this survey we overview XAI approaches built using methods from the field of computational argumentation, leveraging its wide array of reasoning abstractions and explanation delivery methods. We overview the literature focusing on different types of explanation (intrinsic and post-hoc), different models with which argumentation-based explanations are deployed, different forms of delivery, and different argumentation frameworks they use. We also lay out a roadmap for future work.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
6

Heyninck, Jesse, Gabriele Kern-Isberner, Tjitze Rienstra, Kenneth Skiba, and Matthias Thimm. "Possibilistic Logic Underlies Abstract Dialectical Frameworks." In Thirty-First International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence {IJCAI-22}. California: International Joint Conferences on Artificial Intelligence Organization, 2022. http://dx.doi.org/10.24963/ijcai.2022/368.

Full text
Abstract:
Abstract dialectical frameworks (in short, ADFs) are one of the most general and unifying approaches to formal argumentation. As the semantics of ADFs are based on three-valued interpretations, we ask which monotonic three-valued logic allows to capture the main semantic concepts underlying ADFs. We show that possibilistic logic is the unique logic that can faithfully encode all other semantical concepts for ADFs. Based on this result, we also characterise strong equivalence and introduce possibilistic ADFs.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
7

Verheij, Bart. "Legal decision making as dialectical theory construction with argumentation schemes." In the 8th international conference. New York, New York, USA: ACM Press, 2001. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/383535.383565.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
8

Cayrol, C., C. Devred, and M. C. Lagasquie-Schiex. "Dialectical Proofs Accounting for Strength of Attacks in Argumentation Systems." In 2010 22nd International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence (ICTAI). IEEE, 2010. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ictai.2010.36.

Full text
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
9

Irwin, Benjamin, Antonio Rago, and Francesca Toni. "Forecasting Argumentation Frameworks." In 19th International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning {KR-2022}. California: International Joint Conferences on Artificial Intelligence Organization, 2022. http://dx.doi.org/10.24963/kr.2022/55.

Full text
Abstract:
We introduce Forecasting Argumentation Frameworks (FAFs), a novel argumentation-based methodology for forecasting informed by recent judgmental forecasting research. FAFs comprise update frameworks which empower (human or artificial) agents to argue over time about the probability of outcomes, e.g. the winner of an election or a fluctuation in inflation rates, whilst flagging perceived irrationality in the agents' behaviour with a view to improving their forecasting accuracy. FAFs include five argument types, amounting to standard pro/con arguments, as in bipolar argumentation, as well as novel proposal arguments and increase/decrease amendment arguments. We adapt an existing gradual semantics for bipolar argumentation to determine the aggregated dialectical strength of proposal arguments and define irrational behaviour. We then give a simple aggregation function which produces a final group forecast from rational agents' individual forecasts. We identify and study properties of FAFs, and conduct an empirical evaluation which signals FAFs' potential to increase the forecasting accuracy of participants.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
10

Heyninck, Jesse, and Christian Straßer. "Revisiting Unrestricted Rebut and Preferences in Structured Argumentation." In Twenty-Sixth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence. California: International Joint Conferences on Artificial Intelligence Organization, 2017. http://dx.doi.org/10.24963/ijcai.2017/151.

Full text
Abstract:
In structured argumentation frameworks such as ASPIC+, rebuts are only allowed in conclusions produced by defeasible rules. This has been criticized as counter-intuitive especially in dialectical contexts. In this paper we show that ASPIC-, a system allowing for unrestricted rebuts, suffers from contamination problems. We remedy this shortcoming by generalizing the attack rule of unrestricted rebut. Our resulting system satisfies the usual rationality postulates for prioritized rule bases.
APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles
You might also be interested in the extended bibliographies on the topic 'Dialectical argumentation' for particular source types:
Journal articles Dissertations / Theses Books
We offer discounts on all premium plans for authors whose works are included in thematic literature selections. Contact us to get a unique promo code!

To the bibliography