To see the other types of publications on this topic, follow the link: Logics and argumentation.
Dissertations / Theses on the topic 'Logics and argumentation'
Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles
Consult the top 49 dissertations / theses for your research on the topic 'Logics and 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.
Browse dissertations / theses on a wide variety of disciplines and organise your bibliography correctly.
1
Baumann, Ringo. "Metalogical Contributions to the Nonmonotonic Theory of Abstract Argumentation." Doctoral thesis, Universitätsbibliothek Leipzig, 2014. http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bsz:15-qucosa-132973.
Full textAbstract:
The study of nonmonotonic logics is one mayor field of Artificial Intelligence (AI). The reason why such kind of formalisms are so attractive to model human reasoning is that they allow to withdraw former conclusion. At the end of the 1980s the novel idea of using argumentation to model nonmonotonic reasoning emerged in AI. Nowadays argumentation theory is a vibrant research area in AI, covering aspects of knowledge representation, multi-agent systems, and also philosophical questions.
Phan Minh Dung’s abstract argumentation frameworks (AFs) play a dominant role in the field of argumentation. In AFs arguments
and attacks between them are treated as primitives, i.e. the
internal structure of arguments is not considered. The major focus is
on resolving conflicts. To this end a variety of semantics have been defined, each of them specifying acceptable sets of arguments, so-called extensions, in a particular way. Although, Dung-style AFs are among the simplest argumentation systems one can think of, this approach is still powerful. It can be seen as a general theory capturing several nonmonotonic formalisms as well as a tool for solving well-known problems as the stable-marriage problem.
This thesis is mainly concerned with the investigation of metalogical
properties of Dung’s abstract theory. In particular, we provide cardinality, monotonicity and splitting results as well as characterization theorems for equivalence notions. The established results have theoretical and practical gains. On the one hand, they yield deeper theoretical insights into how this nonmonotonic theory works, and on the other the obtained results can be used to refine existing algorithms or even give rise to new computational procedures. A further main part is the study of problems regarding dynamic aspects of abstract argumentation. Most noteworthy we solve the so-called enforcing and the more general minimal change problem for a huge number of semantics.
2
Raddaoui, Badran. "Contributions aux approches logiques de l'argumentation en intelligence artificielle." Thesis, Artois, 2013. http://www.theses.fr/2013ARTO0412/document.
Full textAbstract:
Cette thèse se situe dans le domaine des modèles de l’argumentation en intelligence artificielle. Ces modèles constituent des outils très populaires pour l’étude de raisonnements en présence d’incohérences dans les bases de connaissances et lors de la négociation entre agents et la prise de décision. Un modèle argumentatif est un processus interactionnel principalement basé sur la construction d’arguments et de contre-arguments, l’étude des relations entre ces différents arguments et la mise en place de critères permettant de déterminer le statut de chaque argument afin de sélectionner les arguments (les plus) acceptables.Dans ce cadre, ce travail a porté sur l’étude d’un système particulier : le système d’argumentation déductif. Un argument est alors entendu comme un couple prémisses-conclusion tel que la conclusion soit une formule qui puisse être déduite des prémisses. Nous y avons traité plusieurs questions. Tout d’abord, partant du constat que le raisonnement par l’absurde est valide en logique propositionnelle classique, nous proposons une méthode de génération d’arguments en faveur d’une proposition donnée. Cette approche s’étend au calcul des undercuts canoniques, arguments identifiés comme représentant tous les contre-arguments. Contrairement aux autres approches proposées dans la littérature, notre technique est complète au sens où elle permet de générer, modulo une possible explosion combinatoire, tous les arguments relatifs à une formule logique quelconque. Ensuite, nous avons proposé un cadre d’argumentation en logique conditionnelle. Les logiques conditionnelles sont souvent considérées comme étant tout particulièrement adaptées à la formalisation de raisonnements de nature hypothétique. Leur connecteur conditionnel est en effet souvent plus proche de l’intuition que l’on peut avoir de l’implication que ne l’est l’implication matérielle de la logique propositionnelle classique. Ceci nous permet de proposer un concept de contrariété conditionnelle qui couvre à la fois les situations de conflits logiques fondés sur l’incohérence et une forme particulière de conflit qui ne se traduit pas naturellement par un conflit basé sur l’incohérence : quand un agent affirme une règle de type Si alors, une seconde règle qui peut en être déduite et qui impose la satisfaction de prémisses supplémentaires peut apparaître conflictuelle. Nous étudions alors sur cette base les principaux éléments d’une théorie de l’argumentation dans une logique conditionnelle. Enfin, le dernier point étudié dans ce travail concerne le raisonnement au sujet de ressources consommables, dans un cadre où les formules logiques sont elles mêmes consommées dans le processus déductif. Nous proposons une logique, simple et proche du langage et des principes de la logique propositionnelle classique, permettant le raisonnement à partir de ressources consommables et de quantité bornée. Nous y revisitons également les principaux éléments d’une théorie logique de l’argumentationThis thesis focus on the field of argumentation models in artificial intelligence. These models form very popular tools to study reasoning under inconsistency in knowledge bases, negotiation between agents, and also in decision making. An argumentative model is an interactional process mainly based on the construction of arguments and counter-arguments, then studying the relations between these arguments, and finally the introduction of some criteria to identifying the status of each argument in order to select the (most) acceptable of them.In this context, this work was dealt with the study of a particular system: the deductive argumentation framework. An argument is then understood as a pair premises-conclusion such that conclusion is a logical formula entailed by premises, a non-ordered collection of logical formulas. We have addressed several issues. First of all, on the basis that reductio ad absurdum is valid in classical propositional logic, we propose a method to compute arguments for a given statement. This approach is extended to generate canonical undercuts, arguments identified as the representative of all counter-arguments. Contrary to the other approaches proposed in the literature, our technique is complete in the sense that all arguments relative to the statement at hand are generated and so are all relevant counter-arguments. Secondly, we proposed a logic based argumentation in conditional logic. Conditional logic is often regarded as an appealing setting for the formalization of hypothetical reasoning. Their conditional connective is often regarded as a very suitable connective to encode many implicative reasoning patterns real-life and attempts to avoid some pitfalls of material implication of propositional logic. This allows us to put in light and encompass a concept of conditional contrariety thats covers both usual inconsistency-based conflict and a specific form of conflict that often occurs in real-life argumentation: i.e., when an agent asserts an If then rule, it can be argued that the satisfaction of additional conditions are required for the conclusion of a rule to hold. Then, in that case we study the main foundational concepts of an argumentation theory in conditional logic. Finally, the last point investigated in this work concerns the reasoning about bounded resources, within a framework in which logical formulas are themselves consumed in the deductive process. First, a simple variant of Boolean logic is introduced, allowing us to reason about consuming resources. Then, the main concepts of logic-based argumentation are revisited in this framework
3
Mann, N. "Logical argumentation using generalised knowledge." Thesis, University College London (University of London), 2008. http://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/1446286/.
Full textAbstract:
Computers are increasingly being used in situations where a conclusion must be reached based on a wide range of knowledge. As the volume of this stored knowledge increases, so does the possibility of inconsistency within that knowledge. Argumen tation is one solution to this problem, and argumentation based upon propositional logic has been extensively explored in the literature. However, this is insufficient for many applications, such as the use of temporal data. First order logic is a possi ble solution from the literature, but not all of the issues concerning this have been explored. This thesis discusses aspects of argumentation using extensions to propositional logic in order to explore the space of possibilities between propositional logic and full first order logic. In particular, logics with some form of generalisation are considered, incorporating variable, function and predicate symbols. The first form of generalisation considered includes an argumentation system using a calculus which is capable of expressing temporal knowledge. This general isation offers two new and complementary notions of an argument, and these are shown to have some advantages over more traditional arguments in some circum stances. The second form of generalisation concerns predicate and function symbols, and is based around applications of causal mapping, which is a technique using a graphical representation of a logical database in order to show how letters within that database influence each other. Argumentation using this generalisation is con sidered, and a method for representing arguments graphically in causal maps is introduced. The third form of generalisation considers full first order logic, and the methods proposed in previous chapters are used as an insight into problems within first order argumentation. An alternative definition of an argument is proposed as a solution to these problems, and these are considered within argument trees. In conclusion, in this thesis I have shown how first order extensions to proposi tional logic can be used within argumentation systems. I have shown some prob lems when using generalisations, and presented solutions to these problems. These problems and solutions are explored when using first order logic directly in argu mentation.
4
AMARAL, Stefânio Ramalho do. "Estratégias argumentativas de universitários: estudo comparativo de três práticas pedagógicas." Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, 2016. https://repositorio.ufpe.br/handle/123456789/18864.
Full textAbstract:
Submitted by Fabio Sobreira Campos da Costa (fabio.sobreira@ufpe.br) on 2017-05-23T12:47:39Z
No. of bitstreams: 2
license_rdf: 811 bytes, checksum: e39d27027a6cc9cb039ad269a5db8e34 (MD5)
@ STEFÂNIO AMARAL - biblioteca - FINAL.pdf: 1963384 bytes, checksum: fe89df35e593e6c0282f29835617dffd (MD5)Made available in DSpace on 2017-05-23T12:47:39Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 2 license_rdf: 811 bytes, checksum: e39d27027a6cc9cb039ad269a5db8e34 (MD5) @ STEFÂNIO AMARAL - biblioteca - FINAL.pdf: 1963384 bytes, checksum: fe89df35e593e6c0282f29835617dffd (MD5) Previous issue date: 2016-02-24
CNPQ
Este estudo teve objetivo de investigar possíveis diferenças no raciocínio argumentativo de estudantes universitários que passaram por três diferentes práticas pedagógicas. O raciocínio argumentativo é compreendido como uma atividade fundamentalmente metacognitiva, realizada através de estratégias como justificação de ideias, antecipação de perspectivas alternativas e contrárias, e réplica a perspectivas divergentes (KUHN, 1991). A especificidade analítica consistiu na comparação de estratégias argumentativas exibidas pelos participantes na reflexão sobre assuntos quotidianos e controversos. A partir de adaptações do roteiro de entrevista proposto por Kuhn (1991), foram realizadas entrevistas semiestruturadas individuais sobre dois tópicos quotidianos, sociais e polemizáveis, sobre os quais os participantes poderiam elaborar suas perspectivas (teorias causais), justificá-las usando evidências, antecipar possíveis teorias alternativas e contra-argumentos, e replicar a estas perspectivas divergentes. Participaram do estudo 15 indivíduos, distribuídos em três grupos, de acordo com as disciplinas cursadas: seis estudantes de uma disciplina que foca a argumentação como mediadora para ensino-aprendizagem de conteúdos curriculares de psicologia, quatro estudantes de uma disciplina introdutória à lógica e cinco estudantes de um terceiro curso de humanidades, o qual não possui regularmente em sua estrutura curricular práticas com foco específico no raciocínio de estudantes. Os dados foram analisados em dois níveis: identificação, no conjunto de dados, das categorias propostas por Kuhn (1991), e comparação dos grupos quanto a possíveis diferenças nas estratégias argumentativas exibidas pelos participantes na reflexão sobre os tópicos propostos. As análises mostraram que a inserção em disciplinas focadas na melhoria do raciocínio (DIP e DIL) mobiliza no indivíduo uma tendência a refletir sobre os fundamentos (através da elaboração de evidências) e limites de suas ideias (antecipando contra-argumentos e teorias alternativas). Discute-se que fatores como motivação, falta de preparo prévio e conceituações acerca do objetivo central da argumentação (defesa do próprio ponto de vista e consideração de perspectivas alternativas) podem explicar o limitado desempenho observado em algumas competências.
This study aims to investigate possible differences in argumentative reasoning of university students who have gone through three different pedagogical experiences. The argumentative reasoning is understood as a fundamentally metacognitive activity held through strategies such as justification of ideas, anticipation of alternative and opposing perspectives, and rebuttal of divergent perspectives (KUHN, 1991). The analytical specificity of this study consists on comparison of argumentative strategies that appear as one thinks about everyday and controversial topics. The method was based in adaptations of the interview script proposed by Kuhn (1991), that is, individual semi-structured interviews about two common, social and controversial topics in which participants should develop their perspectives (causal theories), justify them using evidence, anticipate alternative theories and counter-arguments, and rebuttal these divergent perspectives. The study included 15 participants divided into three groups according to the subjects they studied: six students of a course that focuses on the argument as a mediator of teaching and learning of contents from psychology curriculum (DIP), four students of Introduction to Logic (DIL), five students of another humanities course which does not focus on the development of the reasoning. The data were analyzed in two levels: analysis in order to identify the set of the data collected among the categories proposed by Kuhn (1991), and compare possible differences in argumentative strategies displayed by the participants in the debate on the proposed topics. The analysis showed that the inclusion of disciplines that focused on the improvement of reasoning (DIP and DIL) mobilizes in the individual a tendency to think about the grounds (through the development of evidence) and limits of their ideas (anticipating counter-arguments and alternative theories). So this study argues that factors such as motivation, lack of prior preparation and concepts about the main objective of the argument (defense's own point of view and consideration of alternative perspectives) can explain the weak performance observed in some skills.
5
Preacher, Jon Nelsen. "Implicature and argumentation." CSUSB ScholarWorks, 2003. https://scholarworks.lib.csusb.edu/etd-project/2437.
Full textAbstract:
This thesis explores the role, if any, that implicature plays as a strategy in informal debate. Transcripts of spontaneous debates from television and radio public affairs talk shows were analyzed with a focus on the use of implicature as a strategic rhetorical tool employed to gain advantage in an argument.
6
Bianchi, Cezira [UNESP]. "A lógica no desenvolvimento da competência argumentativa." Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP), 2007. http://hdl.handle.net/11449/102152.
Full textAbstract:
Made available in DSpace on 2014-06-11T19:31:43Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0
Previous issue date: 2007-04-24Bitstream added on 2014-06-13T21:03:14Z : No. of bitstreams: 1
bianchi_c_dr_rcla.pdf: 3784213 bytes, checksum: 74a2fc2a0783a2ad9b404b340de5e04e (MD5)Este trabalho mostra um caminho para a mudança, na prática pedagógica, pela inserção da Lógica no currículo, como tema transdisciplinar, articulador do raciocínio e construtor da argumentação. A proposta é inverter o papel do modo de pensar: de coadjuvante para protagonista. Quando as idéias forem veículos para os alunos compreenderem que podem pensar bem e reinventar idéias, os conteúdos serão menos esquecidos. Ensinando modos de pensar, otimizamos a capacidade de análise de quaisquer textos, tenham informações matemáticas ou não. Pela linguagem, construímos consensos que nos possibilitam viver em sociedade: quanto mais construímos sentidos para nossa vida, mais nos tornamos sujeitos históricos partícipes da realidade, assumindo posição na reconstrução dos discursos, passando da simples repetição das falas dos outros à nossa condição de autores, críticos e criativos. Que esta proposta possa ser um embrião para a Lógica passar a ser meio e método de transformação do conhecimento real pela análise crítica, contribuindo para um futuro melhor, ajudando os educadores a desenvolver em seus alunos as capacidades discursiva e argumentativa, o raciocínio e o senso crítico.
This work shows a way to improve teachers posture by inserting Logic as a subject at regular schools programs. We understand 'Logic as a thought articulator e and argumentation builder. The idea is to create a main role for the ways of how to think. When the ideas are tools for the students to understand they can think about and re-invent ideas, the contents taught will not be so quite forgotten. By teaching how to think, we optimize the analysis capacity of any texts, whether they involve mathematical issues or not. We build consenses that will make our life in society possible: the more we build sense to our life, the more aware we become of our role of citizens who should take part in the society's decisions, not by repeating other people's speeches, but creating our own, becoming authors, critics and creative. May this project be a seed so Logic can become a tool to change real knowledge by critical analysis, contributing to a better future, helping teachers to develop the speech and argumentation capacity of the students, improving their critical sense.
7
Lindgren, Helena. "Decision support in dementia care : developing systems for interactive reasoning." Doctoral thesis, Umeå : Datavetenskap Computing Science, 2007. http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-1138.
Full text
8
Loureiro, E. N. "Logical and emotional argumentation by Brazilian religious ministers." Thesis, University of Sheffield, 2003. http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.401130.
Full text
9
Bouyahia, Tarek. "Metrics for security activities assisted by argumentative logic." Thesis, Ecole nationale supérieure Mines-Télécom Atlantique Bretagne Pays de la Loire, 2017. http://www.theses.fr/2017IMTA0013/document.
Full textAbstract:
L'accroissement et la diversification des services offerts par les systèmes informatiques modernes rendent la tâche de sécuriser ces systèmes encore plus complexe. D'une part, l'évolution du nombre de services système accroît le nombre des vulnérabilités qui peuvent être exploitées par des attaquants afin d'atteindre certains objectifs d'intrusion. D'autre part, un système de sécurité moderne doit assurer un certain niveau de performance et de qualité de service tout en maintenant l'état de sécurité. Ainsi, les systèmes de sécurité modernes doivent tenir compte des exigences de l'utilisateur au cours du processus de sécurité. En outre, la réaction dans des contextes critiques contre une attaque après son exécution ne peut pas toujours remédier à ses effets néfastes. Dans certains cas, il est essentiel que le système de sécurité soit en avance de phase par rapport à l'attaquant et de prendre les mesures nécessaires pour l'empêcher d'atteindre son objectif d'intrusion. Nous soutenons dans cette thèse que le processus de sécurité doit suivre un raisonnement intelligent qui permet au système de prévoir les attaques qui peuvent se produire par corrélation à une alerte détectée et d'appliquer les meilleures contre-mesures possibles. Nous proposons une approche qui génère des scénarios potentiels d'attaque qui correspondent à une alerte détectée. Ensuite, nous nous concentrons sur le processus de génération d'un ensemble approprié de contre-mesures contre les scénarios d'attaque générés. Un ensemble généré des contre-mesures est considéré comme approprié dans l'approche proposée s'il présente un ensemble cohérent et il satisfait les exigences de l'administrateur de sécurité (par exemple, la disponibilité). Nous soutenons dans cette thèse que le processus de réaction peut être considéré comme un débat entre deux agents. D'un côté, l'attaquant choisit ses arguments comme étant un ensemble d'actions pour essayer d'atteindre un objectif d'intrusion, et de l'autre côté l'agent défendant la cible choisit ses arguments comme étant un ensemble de contre-mesures pour bloquer la progression de l'attaquant ou atténuer les effets de l'attaque. D'autre part, nous proposons une approche basée sur une méthode d'aide à la décision multicritère. Cette approche assiste l'administrateur de sécurité lors de la sélection des contre-mesures parmi l'ensemble approprié des contre-mesures générées à partir de la première approche. Le processus d'assistance est basé sur l'historique des décisions de l'administrateur de sécurité. Cette approche permet également de sélectionner automatiquement des contre-mesures appropriées lorsque l'administrateur de sécurité est dans l'incapacité de les sélectionner (par exemple, en dehors des heures de travail, par manque de connaissances sur l'attaque). Enfin, notre approche est implémentée et testée dans le cadre des systèmes automobilesThe growth and diversity of services offered by modern systems make the task of securing these systems a complex exercise. On the one hand, the evolution of the number of system services increases the risk of causing vulnerabilities. These vulnerabilities can be exploited by malicious users to reach some intrusion objectives. On the other hand, the most recent competitive systems are those that ensure a certain level of performance and quality of service while maintaining the safety state. Thus, modern security systems must consider the user requirements during the security process.In addition, reacting in critical contexts against an attack after its execution can not always mitigate the adverse effects of the attack. In these cases, security systems should be in a phase ahead of the attacker in order to take necessary measures to prevent him/her from reaching his/her intrusion objective. To address those problems, we argue in this thesis that the reaction process must follow a smart reasoning. This reasoning allows the system, according to a detected attack, to preview the related attacks that may occur and to apply the best possible countermeasures. On the one hand, we propose an approach that generates potential attack scenarios given a detected alert. Then, we focus on the generation process of an appropriate set of countermeasures against attack scenarios generated among all system responses defined for the system. A generated set of countermeasures is considered as appropriate in the proposed approach if it presents a coherent set (i.e., it does not contain conflictual countermeasures) and it satisfies security administrator requirements (e.g., performance, availability). We argue in this thesis that the reaction process can be seen as two agents arguing against each other. On one side the attacker chooses his arguments as a set of actions to try to reach an intrusion objective, and on the other side the agent defending the target chooses his arguments as a set of countermeasures to block the attacker's progress or mitigate the attack effects. On the other hand, we propose an approach based on a recommender system using Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) method. This approach assists security administrators while selecting countermeasures among the appropriate set of countermeasures generated from the first approach. The assistance process is based on the security administrator decisions historic. This approach permits also, to automatically select appropriate system responses in critical cases where the security administrator is unable to select them (e.g., outside working hours, lack of knowledge about the ongoing attack). Finally, our approaches are implemented and tested in the automotive system use case to ensure that our approaches implementation successfully responded to real-time constraints
10
Mailly, Jean-Guy. "Dynamics of argumentation frameworks." Thesis, Artois, 2015. http://www.theses.fr/2015ARTO0402/document.
Full textAbstract:
Cette thèse traite du problème de l'intégration d'une nouvelle information dans un système d'argumentation abstrait. Un tel système est un graphe orienté dont les nœuds représentent les arguments, et les arcs représentent les attaques entre arguments. Il existe divers moyen de décider quels arguments sont acceptés par l'agent qui utilise un tel système pour représenter ses croyances.Il peut arriver dans la vie d'un agent qu'il soit confronté à une information du type "tel argument devrait être accepté", alors que c'est en contradiction avec ses croyances actuelles, représentées par son système d'argumentation.Nous avons étudié dans cette thèse diverses approches pour intégrer une information à un système d'argumentation.Notre première contribution est une adaptation du cadre AGM pour la révision de croyances, habituellement utilisé lorsque les croyances de l'agent sont représentées dans un formalisme logique. Nous avons notamment adapté les postulats de rationalité proposés dans le cadre AGM pour pouvoir caractériser des opérateurs de révision de systèmes d'argumentation, et nous avons proposé différents moyens de générer les systèmes d'argumentation résultant de la révision.Nous avons ensuite proposé d'utiliser la révision AGM comme un outil pour réviser les systèmes d'argumentation. Il s'agit cette fois-ci d'une approche par encodage en logique du système d'argumentation, qui permet d'utiliser les opérateurs de révision usuels pour obtenir le résultat souhaité.Enfin, nous avons étudié le problème du forçage d'un ensemble d'arguments (comment modifier le système pour qu'un ensemble donné soit une extension). Nous avons proposé une nouvelle famille d'opérateurs qui garantissent le succès de l'opération, contrairement aux opérateurs de forçage existants, et nous avons montré qu'une traduction de nos approches en problèmes de satisfaction ou d'optimisation booléenne permet de développer des outils efficaces pour calculer le résultat du forçageThis thesis tackles the problem of integrating a new piece of information in an abstract argumentation framework. Such a framework is a directed graph such that its nodes represent the arguments, and the directed edges represent the attacks between arguments. There are different ways to decide which arguments are accepted by the agent who uses such a framework to represent her beliefs.An agent may be confronted with a piece of information such that "this argument should be accepted", which is in contradiction with her current beliefs, represented by her argumentation framework.In this thesis, we have studied several approaches to incorporate a piece of information in an argumentation framework.Our first contribution is an adaptation of the AGM framework for belief revision, which has been developed for characterizing the incorporation of a new piece of information when the agent's beliefs are represented in a logical setting. We have adapted the rationality postulates from the AGM framework to characterize the revision operators suited to argumentation frameworks, and we have identified several ways to generate the argumentation frameworks resulting from the revision.We have also shown how to use AGM revision as a tool for revising argumentation frameworks. Our approach uses a logical encoding of the argumentation framework to take advantage of the classical revision operators, for deriving the expected result.At last, we have studied the problem of enforcing a set of arguments (how to change an argumentation framework so that a given set of arguments becomes an extension). We have developed a new family of operators which guarantee the success of the enforcement process, contrary to the existing approaches, and we have shown that a translation of our approaches into satisfaction and optimization problems makes possible to develop efficient tools for computing the result of the enforcement
11
Schulz, Claudia. "Developments in abstract and assumption-based argumentation and their application in logic programming." Thesis, Imperial College London, 2017. http://hdl.handle.net/10044/1/56062.
Full textAbstract:
Logic Programming (LP) and Argumentation are two paradigms for knowledge representation and reasoning under incomplete information. Even though the two paradigms share common features, they constitute mostly separate areas of research. In this thesis, we present novel developments in Argumentation, in particular in Assumption-Based Argumentation (ABA) and Abstract Argumentation (AA), and show how they can 1) extend the understanding of the relationship between the two paradigms and 2) provide solutions to problematic reasoning outcomes in LP. More precisely, we introduce assumption labellings as a novel way to express the semantics of ABA and prove a more straightforward relationship with LP semantics than found in previous work. Building upon these correspondence results, we apply methods for argument construction and conflict detection from ABA, and for conflict resolution from AA, to construct justifications of unexpected or unexplained LP solutions under the answer set semantics. We furthermore characterise reasons for the non-existence of stable semantics in AA and apply these findings to characterise different scenarios in which the computation of meaningful solutions in LP under the answer set semantics fails.
12
Zheng, Man. "Management of an intelligent argumentation network for a web-based collaborative engineering design environment." Diss., Rolla, Mo. : University of Missouri-Rolla, 2007. http://scholarsmine.umr.edu/thesis/pdf/Zheng_09007dcc803e416f.pdf.
Full textAbstract:
Thesis (M.S.)--University of Missouri--Rolla, 2007.Vita. The entire thesis text is included in file. Title from title screen of thesis/dissertation PDF file (viewed April 22, 2008) Includes bibliographical references (p. 33-35).
13
Eriksson, Lundström Jenny S. Z. "On the Formal Modeling of Games of Language and Adversarial Argumentation : A Logic-Based Artificial Intelligence Approach." Doctoral thesis, Uppsala universitet, Institutionen för informationsvetenskap, 2009. http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-9538.
Full textAbstract:
Argumentation is a highly dynamical and dialectical process drawing on human cognition. Successful argumentation is ubiquitous to human interaction. Comprehensive formal modeling and analysis of argumentation presupposes a dynamical approach to the following phenomena: the deductive logic notion, the dialectical notion and the cognitive notion of justified belief. For each step of an argumentation these phenomena form networks of rules which determine the propositions to be allowed to make sense as admissible, acceptable, and accepted. We present a formal logic framework for a computational account of formal modeling and systematical analysis of the dynamical, exhaustive and dialectical aspects of adversarial argumentation and dispute. Our approach addresses the mechanisms of admissibility, acceptability and acceptance of arguments in adversarial argumentation by use of metalogic representation and Artificial Intelligence-techniques for dynamical problem solving by exhaustive search. We elaborate on a common framework of board games and argumentation games for pursuing the alternatives facing the adversaries in the argumentation process conceived as a game. The analogy to chess is beneficial as it incorporates strategic and tactical operations just as argumentation. Drawing on an analogy to board games like chess, the state space representation, well researched in Artificial Intelligence, allows for a treatment of all possible arguments as paths in a directed state space graph. It will render a game leading to the most wins and fewest losses, identifying the most effective game strategy. As an alternate visualization, the traversal of the state space graph unravels and collates knowledge about the given situation/case under dispute. Including the private knowledge of the two parties, the traversal results in an increased knowledge of the case and the perspectives and arguments of the participants. As we adopt metalogic as formal basis, arguments used in the argumentation, expressed in a non-monotonic defeasible logic, are encoded as terms in the logical argumentation analysis system. The advantage of a logical formalization of argumentation is that it provides a symbolic knowledge representation with a formally well-formed semantics, making the represented knowledge as well as the behavior of knowledge representation systems reasoning comprehensible. Computational logic as represented in Horn Clauses allows for expression of substantive propositions in a logical structure. The non-monotonic nature of defeasible logic stresses the representational issues, i.e. what is possible to capture in non-monotonic reasoning, while from the (meta)logic program, the sound computation on what it is possible to compute, and how to regard the semantics of this computation, are established.
14
Eriksson, Lundström Jenny. "On the formal modeling of games of language and adversarial argumentation : a logic-based artificial intelligence approach /." Uppsala : Uppsala universitet, 2009. http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-9538.
Full text
15
Carmler, Alexander. "Questioning the unquestionable : A normative study of the values, argumentation and logic of the Swedish drug policy." Thesis, Södertörns högskola, Statsvetenskap, 2021. http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:sh:diva-45717.
Full textAbstract:
Sweden’s drug policy still invokes the ideas of zero-tolerance and prohibition despite the high reported number of drug-related deaths and arrest rates for using drugs in Sweden in the latest years. To reach knowledge about why prohibition of illegal drugs has remained such a strong staple of Swedish politics for the latest 60 years, this study asks questions about which ideas and arguments constituting the Swedish drug policy, examines the logical coherence of these, and proposes an alternative policy route which aims to mitigate the shortcomings of the current policy. The drug policy field is extensive and studies from different nations show that drug policies that move away from prohibitionist ideas have succeeded in both reducing drug-related mortality rates and reducing the stigma that is attached to either using or abusing psychoactive drugs. Because of an identified unclarity of why the prohibitionary ideas in Sweden have remained despite recent developments, this study aims to fill a gap in existing research by normatively analyzing the ideas in the policy. Since these ideas have great importance in restrictions of individual liberty and public health considerations, knowledge about them is essential to create because liberty and public health are fundamental aspects in any democratic society. The research endeavor performs an internal validity check as the methodological approach to check the internal logic and arguments of the policy and uses a theory of liberty to shed light on the trade-offs between liberty and public health. What is discovered is that the Swedish drug policy builds on inconsistent arguments and incoherent logic and has a moralizing intent that allows for restrictions on individual liberty to reach a utopian vision of a drug-free society. Also, this study shows that it is possible to create a policy that can mitigate the harms caused by the current by adhering to the principle that individual liberty should stretch as far as possible when no harm is caused to another. The implications of this are that it will be harder to justify the zero-tolerance approach in the future and that future policy must look to other policy approaches rather than build policy on assumptions based on outdated moralism.
16
Bianchi, Cezira. "A lógica no desenvolvimento da competência argumentativa /." Rio Claro : [s.n.], 2007. http://hdl.handle.net/11449/102152.
Full textAbstract:
Orientador: Irineu BicudoBanca: Antônio Marmo de Oliveira
Banca: Idania Blanca Peña Grass
Banca: Antonio Vicente Marafioti Garnica
Banca: Renata Cristina Geromel Meneghetti
Resumo: Este trabalho mostra um caminho para a mudança, na prática pedagógica, pela inserção da Lógica no currículo, como tema transdisciplinar, articulador do raciocínio e construtor da argumentação. A proposta é inverter o papel do "modo de pensar": de coadjuvante para protagonista. Quando as idéias forem veículos para os alunos compreenderem que podem pensar bem e reinventar idéias, os conteúdos serão menos esquecidos. Ensinando modos de pensar, otimizamos a capacidade de análise de quaisquer textos, tenham informações matemáticas ou não. Pela linguagem, construímos consensos que nos possibilitam viver em sociedade: quanto mais construímos sentidos para nossa vida, mais nos tornamos sujeitos históricos partícipes da realidade, assumindo posição na reconstrução dos discursos, passando da simples repetição das falas dos outros à nossa condição de autores, críticos e criativos. Que esta proposta possa ser um embrião para a Lógica passar a ser meio e método de transformação do conhecimento real pela análise crítica, contribuindo para um futuro melhor, ajudando os educadores a desenvolver em seus alunos as capacidades discursiva e argumentativa, o raciocínio e o senso crítico.
Abstract: This work shows a way to improve teachers posture by inserting "Logic" as a subject at regular schools programs. We understand 'Logic" as a thought articulator e and argumentation builder. The idea is to create a main role for the ways of how to think. When the ideas are tools for the students to understand they can think about and re-invent ideas, the contents taught will not be so quite forgotten. By teaching how to think, we optimize the analysis capacity of any texts, whether they involve mathematical issues or not. We build consenses that will make our life in society possible: the more we build sense to our life, the more aware we become of our role of citizens who should take part in the society's decisions, not by repeating other people's speeches, but creating our own, becoming authors, critics and creative. May this project be a seed so "Logic" can become a tool to change real knowledge by critical analysis, contributing to a better future, helping teachers to develop the speech and argumentation capacity of the students, improving their critical sense.
Doutor
17
Guerrero, Rosero Esteban. "Representing and Reasoning about Complex Human Activities - an Activity-Centric Argumentation-Based Approach." Doctoral thesis, Umeå universitet, Institutionen för datavetenskap, 2016. http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-120272.
Full textAbstract:
The aim of this thesis is to develop theories and formal methods to endow a computing machinery with capabilities to identify, represent, reason and evaluate complex activities that are directed by an individual’s needs, goals, motives, preferences and environment, information which can be inconsistent and incomplete. Current methods for formalising and reasoning about human activity are typically limited to basic actions, e.g., walking, sitting, sleeping, etc., excluding elements of an activity. This research proposes a new formal activity-centric model that captures complex human activity based on a systemic activity structure that is understood as a purposeful, social, mediated, hierarchically organized and continuously developing interaction between people and word. This research has also resulted in a common-sense reasoning method based on argumentation, in order to provide defeasible explanations of the activity that an individual performs based on the activity-centric model of human activity. Reasoning about an activity is based on the novel notion of an argument under semantics-based inferences that is developed in this research, which allows the building of structured arguments and inferring consistent conclusions. Structured arguments are used for explaining complex activities in a bottom-up manner, by introducing the notion of fragments of activity. Based on these fragments, consistent argumentation based interpretations of activity can be generated, which adhere to the activity-centric model of complex human activity. For resembling the kind of deductive analysis that a clinician performs in the assessment of activities, two quantitative measurements for evaluating performance and capacity are introduced and formalized. By analysing these qualifiers using different argumentation semantics, information useful for different purposes can be generated. e.g., such as detecting risk in older adults for falling down, or more specific information about activity performance and activity completion. Both types of information can form the base for an intelligent machinery to provide tailored recommendation to an individual. The contributions were implemented in different proof-of-concept systems, designed for evaluating complex activities and improving individual’s health in daily life. These systems were empirically evaluated with the purpose of evaluating theories and methodologies with potential users. The results have the potential to be utilized in domains such as ambient assisted living, assistive technology, activity assessment and self-management systems for improving health.
18
Petersen, Soren Ingomar. "Design quantification design concept argumentation as related to product performance metrics /." May be available electronically:, 2009. http://proquest.umi.com/login?COPT=REJTPTU1MTUmSU5UPTAmVkVSPTI=&clientId=12498.
Full text
19
Fontaine, Matthieu. "Argumentation et engagement ontologique de l’acte intentionnel : Pour une réflexion critique sur l’identité dans les logiques intentionnelles explicites." Thesis, Lille 3, 2013. http://www.theses.fr/2013LIL30025/document.
Full textAbstract:
L'intentionalité est la faculté qu'a l'esprit humain de se diriger vers des objets de toutes sortes. On la capture linguistiquement à travers l'usage de verbes comme "savoir", "croire", "craindre", "espérer". Les énoncés intentionnels comme "Jean croit que Nosferatu est un vampire" ou "Oedipe aime Jocaste" défient les lois de la logique classique, remettant en cause la validité de principes logiques tels que la généralisation existentielle ou encore la substitution des identiques. Je propose dans ma thèse une analyse fondée sur les logiques intentionnelles explicites, des logiques où le langage est enrichi au moyen d'opérateurs qui expriment explicitement l'intentionalité. Des aspects originaux de la signification des énoncés intentionnels sont saisis au coeur des pratiques argumentatives, dans le contexte de la logique dialogique notamment. S'intéressant plus spécifiquement au cas de la fictionalité, paradigme où se mêlent naturellement considérations logiques, linguistiques et métaphysiques, je défends une théorie artefactuelle dans laquelle on définit des critères d'existence et d'identité pour les identités fictionnelles littéraires au moyen de la notion de relation de dépendance ontologique. La notion de dépendance ontologique est toutefois sujette à de graves difficultés que l'on repasse ici dans le contexte d'une sémantique modale-Temporelle, défendant alors une approche novatrice de la dimension artefactuelle des fictions. In fine, on propose une combinaison de la théorie artefactuelle à une sémantique pour l'opérateur de fictionalité qui permet l'articulation entre différents points de vue sur la fiction, les points de vue interne et externe notammentIntentionality is that faculty of human mind whereby it is directed towards objects of all kinds. It is recorded linguistically in verbs such as "to know", "to believe", "to fear", "to hope". Intentional statements such as "John thinks that Nosferatu is a vampire" or "Oedipus loves Jocasta" challenge classical logical laws such as existential generalization or substitution of identical. I propose here an analysis grounded on explicit intentional logics, i. e. logics in which languages are enriched by means of specific operators expressing intentionality. Some original aspects of the meanings of intentional statements are grasped within argumentative practices, more specifically in the context of dialogical logic. I focus more specifically on fictionality, a paradigm in which logical, linguistic and metaphysical considerations are naturally embedded. I defend an artifactual theory in which existence and identity criteria for fictional entities are defined by means of the notion of ontological dependence relation. That notion faces several difficulties overcome here in a modal-Temporal semantics in which an innovating approach to the artifactual diemnsion of fiction is defended. Ultimately, a combination of that theory to a semantic for the fictionality operator is suggested. This enable us to articulate external and internal viewpoints on fictionality
20
Brinkerhoff, Jennifer Alder. "Applying Toulmin's Argumentation Framework to Explanations in a Reform Oriented Mathematics Class." Diss., CLICK HERE for online access, 2007. http://contentdm.lib.byu.edu/ETD/image/etd1960.pdf.
Full text
21
Pinto, Alexandre Miguel dos Santos Martins. "Every normal logic program has a 2-valued semantics: theory, extensions, applications, implementations." Doctoral thesis, Faculdade de Ciências e Tecnologia, 2011. http://hdl.handle.net/10362/6097.
Full textAbstract:
Trabalho apresentado no âmbito do Doutoramento em Informática, como requisito parcial para obtenção do grau de Doutor em InformáticaAfter a very brief introduction to the general subject of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning with Logic Programs we analyse the syntactic structure of a logic program and how it can influence the semantics. We outline the important properties of a 2-valued semantics for Normal Logic Programs, proceed to define the new Minimal Hypotheses semantics with those properties and explore how it can be used to benefit some knowledge representation and reasoning mechanisms. The main original contributions of this work, whose connections will be detailed in the sequel, are: • The Layering for generic graphs which we then apply to NLPs yielding the Rule Layering and Atom Layering — a generalization of the stratification notion; • The Full shifting transformation of Disjunctive Logic Programs into (highly nonstratified)NLPs; • The Layer Support — a generalization of the classical notion of support; • The Brave Relevance and Brave Cautious Monotony properties of a 2-valued semantics; • The notions of Relevant Partial Knowledge Answer to a Query and Locally Consistent Relevant Partial Knowledge Answer to a Query; • The Layer-Decomposable Semantics family — the family of semantics that reflect the above mentioned Layerings; • The Approved Models argumentation approach to semantics; • The Minimal Hypotheses 2-valued semantics for NLP — a member of the Layer-Decomposable Semantics family rooted on a minimization of positive hypotheses assumption approach; • The definition and implementation of the Answer Completion mechanism in XSB Prolog — an essential component to ensure XSB’s WAM full compliance with the Well-Founded Semantics; • The definition of the Inspection Points mechanism for Abductive Logic Programs;• An implementation of the Inspection Points workings within the Abdual system [21] We recommend reading the chapters in this thesis in the sequence they appear. However, if the reader is not interested in all the subjects, or is more keen on some topics rather than others, we provide alternative reading paths as shown below. 1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8-9-12 Definition of the Layer-Decomposable Semantics family and the Minimal Hypotheses semantics (1 and 2 are optional) 3-6-7-8-10-11-12 All main contributions – assumes the reader is familiarized with logic programming topics 3-4-5-10-11-12 Focus on abductive reasoning and applications.
FCT-MCTES (Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia do Ministério da Ciência,Tecnologia e Ensino Superior)- (no. SFRH/BD/28761/2006)
22
Hašková, Simona. "Managerial calculations from the viewpoint of logic, analysis microeconomics and other theoretical disciplines." Doctoral thesis, Vysoká škola ekonomická v Praze, 2014. http://www.nusl.cz/ntk/nusl-200217.
Full textAbstract:
It is no secret that 'managerial' solutions are not, on average, nearly as reliable as 'technical' solutions. The focus of this work is to clarify the reasons why this is so, and to seek ways to increase the reliability of managerial solutions. The causes of this situation are both subjective (human factor failure), which can be influenced, and objective (complexity of the problem, the specifics of human behaviour, etc.) that can be only minimally influenced. Significant subjective causes at work were identified as: a. cognitive distortions at the mental level of thinking of the problem solvers; b. deficiencies in making inference and drawing conclusions; c. incorrect argumentation. There are two ways to reduce these causes: 1. cultivation of managerial thinking of the problem solvers; 2. the use of reserves in the implementation of approaches and tools of theoretical disciplines that already operate successfully elsewhere and are beneficial for managerial solutions. The first way deals with procedures for managerial solutions formulated in the language of the relevant discipline (the language of management), expressed by natural language and the chain of formulas (calculations) and visual (graphic) tools in the form of managerial decision trees, diagrams and charts with the rules of 'managerial logic'. This is generally defined as a set of approaches, tools, methods and skills needed for credible justification when solving managerial problems. Specifically it deals with: - the 'case-based reasoning' approach, which aims at finding the best point of view on a given problem and analysing all considered aspects within its context step-by-step in detail; - translating the tools and methods of modern logic (especially its intuitionistic version) from the language of logic into the language of management taking into account the factual content of expressive means of the language of management including the ability of their effective application; - respecting the principles of rational and ethical argumentation within managerial solutions. The second way circumvents managerial solution procedures by recasting the managerial task to the task of a scientific discipline (logic, game theory, etc.) and derives the correct result therein. In this context we talk about the use of knowledge of theoretical disciplines in management. Both of these ways are demonstrated in the work in a number of illustrative examples and the annexed case studies addressing the specific tasks of managerial practice.
23
Gustavsson, Erik. "Gud - logisk, verklig eller onödig? : en retorisk analys av Richard Dawkins och John Lennox argumentation om Guds existens." Thesis, Högskolan Kristianstad, Sektionen för lärande och miljö, 2012. http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:hkr:diva-9698.
Full textAbstract:
This study has its background in the debate about religion and the existence of God, which has been an ongoing issue throughout the Western cultural tradition. Today´s information society has been an impact on the increasing interest for this subject. The essay’s main task is to accomplish a rhetorical analysis of two books, Illusionen om Gud (2008) by atheist Richard Dawkins and Guds dödgrävare (2010) by Christian John Lennox, in order to investigate the authors’ use of rhetorical strategies to influence their audience. The texts are studied using a qualitative approach with the theoretical basis of some well-defined rhetorical variables: ethical, logical and pathetic means of persuasion, propaganda, and the important factor that a message always is presented in a certain context in which the recipients both have their own values and subjects to general truths and common frames of reference. The analysis is intended to convey the rhetorical essence of each author, and uses this image to discuss aims and methods in the communication. Both authors demonstrate varying propagandistic strategies and base their arguments from common context and widely recognized frames of reference. Lennox almost exclusively uses methodological logo arguments, while Dawkins often uses the pathetic persuasion founds.
24
Schen, Melissa S. "Scientific reasoning skills development in the introductory biology courses for undergraduates." Columbus, Ohio : Ohio State University, 2007. http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc%5Fnum=osu1187063957.
Full text
25
Wels, Volkhard. "Melanchthons Lehrbücher der Dialektik und Rhetorik als komplementäre Teile einer Argumentationstheorie." Universität Potsdam, 2013. http://opus.kobv.de/ubp/volltexte/2014/6912/.
Full textAbstract:
Der Aufsatz zeigt, dass Melanchthons Änderungen an den traditionellen Lehrinhalten der Dialektik (Logik) und der Rhetorik in erster Linie nicht inhaltlich, sondern durch die argumentationstheoretische Neuausrichtung der beiden Disziplinen motiviert ist.
26
Ventura, Pedro Paulo Ramos. "A racionalidade indutiva: em que consiste?" Universidade do Vale do Rio dos Sinos, 2015. http://www.repositorio.jesuita.org.br/handle/UNISINOS/4959.
Full textAbstract:
Submitted by Silvana Teresinha Dornelles Studzinski (sstudzinski) on 2015-11-24T11:08:18Z
No. of bitstreams: 1
Pedro Paulo Ramos Ventura_.pdf: 550481 bytes, checksum: 6aef3b27d08345e9e4d1968a0d4eee14 (MD5)Made available in DSpace on 2015-11-24T11:08:18Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Pedro Paulo Ramos Ventura_.pdf: 550481 bytes, checksum: 6aef3b27d08345e9e4d1968a0d4eee14 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2015-09-29
CAPES - Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
O objeto geral dessa dissertação consiste em investigar a natureza dos raciocínios indutivos partindo da análise que David Hume faz das inferências indutivas, que dependem, para ele, da capacidade humana de estabelecer inferências a partir de princípios da natureza humana. Os raciocínios relativos às noções de causa e efeito são fundados nas experiências (e na nossa capacidade natural de perceber semelhanças, contiguidade, e de nos habituarmos àquilo que nos aparece em conjunção constante). Em contrapartida, Stuart Mill desenvolve em seu livro A System of Logic (1960) - ((1900)), os cinco métodos de indução que viriam a ser conhecidos como Os Métodos de Mill. Portanto, o papel da capacidade racional indutiva será o motor desta dissertação. O presente trabalho tem como finalidade examinar a proposta de Stuart mil sobre racionalidade indutiva, bem como responder se a indução é uma inferência racional, determinar que tipo de racionalidade está por trás da indução e explicar as várias inferências indutivas que Mill apresenta, com seus exemplos. O principal intuito é fazer um contraponto entre a distinção que Hume estabelece entre ideias, instintos, hábitos, semelhança, contiguidade, causalidade e inferência, e os métodos indutivos de Mill.
The general objectof this dissertation is to investigate the nature of inductive reasoning based on the analysis of David Hume about inductive inferences, which depend, for him, on the human ability to establish inferences from principles of human nature. The reasoning concerning the cause and effect notions are founded on experience (and on our natural ability to perceive similarities, contiguity, and being familiarized to what appears to us as a constant conjunction). On the other hand, Stuart Mill develops in his book A System of Logic (1960) - ((1900)), the five methods of induction that would become known as Mill’s Methods. The role of inductive reasoning capacity will be the guideline of this dissertation. This paper aims to examine Stuart Mill’s proposal of inductive rationality, as well asunderstand if the induction is a rational inference, determine what kind of rationality is behind the induction and explain the various inductive inferences that Mill presents, through his examples. The main purpose is to perform a contrast between the distinction that Hume established between ideas, instincts, habits, similarity, contiguity, causality and inference and Mill’s inductive methods.
27
Karlström, Gustaf. "Förstaklasselevers kollektiva algebraiska resonemang om funktioner." Thesis, Stockholms universitet, Institutionen för matematikämnets och naturvetenskapsämnenas didaktik, 2021. http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:su:diva-194469.
Full textAbstract:
Hur elever utvecklar algebraiska resonemang är inte så välförstått, vilket i kombination med svenska elevers låga resultat vid algebraiska uppgifter på internationella mätningar utgör en problematik. Denna problematik syftar studien att minska genom att undersöka förstaklasselevers kollektiva algebraiska resonemang om funktioner, för att identifiera vilka typer av algebraiskt tänkande som ges uttryck. För att undersöka detta observerades nio grupper av förstaklasselever i deras möte med tre uppgifter om funktioner som sedan kodades efter resonemang, argument, algebraiska aspekter, generalisering, och funktionellt tänkande. Resultatet visar att förstaklasselever är kapabla att resonera kring algebra och närma sig intern säkerhet på sina svar. Elevernas resonemang visade också tecken på alla algebraiska aspekter, relaterande och sökande men inte utökande generaliseringar, och alla kategorier av funktionellt tänkande. Den rekursiva kategorin av funktionellt tänkande kopplades endast till den första uppgiften, vilken var av en dynamisk karaktär vilket är intressant för verksamma lärare då det har implikationen att introducera funktioner med två objekt som variabler.
28
Tarnoff, Jay. "An Investigation of the Role of Confirmation Bias in the Evaluation of Informal Reasoning Fallacies." Diss., Temple University Libraries, 2010. http://cdm16002.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/p245801coll10/id/93269.
Full textAbstract:
School PsychologyPh.D.
A total of 168 undergraduate students at Temple University provided a measure of their prior beliefs and measures of attitude strength on three topics and then attempted to identify and explain informal reasoning fallacies based on the same topics. Contrary to the hypothesized predictions, prior beliefs and measures of attitude strength did not have a significant effect on participants' ability to accept informal reasoning fallacies consistent with their beliefs based on that topic, although agreement with the topic demonstrated modest effects. Furthermore, this research demonstrated that participants have significant difficulty identifying and explaining informal logical fallacies. Ability to identify and explain one informal fallacy is not a significant predictor of the ability to identify and explain other fallacies. Also, ability to identify and explain one fallacy in a topic is a poor predictor of the ability to identify and explain that fallacy in another topic. This research indicates that formal fallacy syllogism scores were the best predictor of the ability to identify and explain informal logical fallacies, and that agreement with the topic and willingness to act on those beliefs demonstrated modest effects. Consistent with studies on dual-processing theory, in informal logic the individual is forced to examine the information presented in the statement and the structure of the statement and then relate it to their prior opinions and attitudes about the topic, and therefore, the acceptance of the fallacy is a matter of motivated reasoning bias or self-deception instead of an error in analytical reasoning. Informal reasoning fallacies represented an error in judgment, or a misunderstanding of the validity of an argument. Practical implications for school psychologists, limitations of this research, and directions for future research were discussed.
Temple University--Theses
29
Heyninck, Jesse [Verfasser], Christian [Gutachter] Straßer, and Ofer [Gutachter] Arieli. "Investigations into the logical foundations of defeasible reasoning : an argumentative perspective / Jesse Heyninck ; Gutachter: Christian Straßer, Ofer Arieli ; Fakultät für Philosophie und Erziehungswissenschaft." Bochum : Ruhr-Universität Bochum, 2019. http://d-nb.info/1187523003/34.
Full text
30
Goltzberg, Stefan. "Théorie bidimensionnelle de l'argumentation: définition, présomption et argument à fortiori." Doctoral thesis, Universite Libre de Bruxelles, 2011. http://hdl.handle.net/2013/ULB-DIPOT:oai:dipot.ulb.ac.be:2013/209921.
Full textAbstract:
La thèse propose une nouvelle théorie de l’argumentation – bidimensionnelle – reposant sur deux paramètres :la force et l’orientation. Quatre types de marqueurs sont identifiés, articulés autour de ces deux paramètres. Le chapitre 1 porte sur le réductionnisme topique :la théorie selon laquelle tous les arguments sont défaisables, c’est-à-dire réfutables.
Le chapitre 2 retrace l’histoire du réductionnisme logique :la théorie selon laquelle tous les arguments valides sont indéfaisables. L’argument étudié est la définition.
Le chapitre 3 présente la théorie bidimensionnelle, qui explique à la fois les arguments défaisables et indéfaisables.
Les chapitre 3 et 4 sont une application de la théorie bidimensionnelle de l’argumentation.
Le chapitre 4 étudie l’argument appelé présomption.
Le chapitre 5 offre un traitement nouveau de l’argument a fortiori.
Doctorat en Philosophie
info:eu-repo/semantics/nonPublished
31
Wels, Volkhard. "Humanistische Ars und deutsche Sprache in Ortholph Fuchspergers "Dialectica deutsch" (1533)." Universität Potsdam, 2014. http://opus.kobv.de/ubp/volltexte/2014/6927/.
Full textAbstract:
Der Aufsatz argumentiert, dass der entscheidende Punkt an Ortholph Fuchspergers "Dialectica deutsch" der Nachweis ist, dass es möglich ist, in deutscher Sprache zu argumentieren. Dies richtet sich gegen die alleinige Verwendung der lateinischen Sprache als wissenschaftlicher Sprache. Fuchsperger zieht damit eine Konsequenz aus der humanistischen Umbestimmung des ars-Begriffes als einer deskriptiven und nicht normativen Verfahrensweise.
32
Wikström, Patrik. "Den argumenterande Olof Palme : en argumentationsanalys av strukturer och strukturbrott i Olof Palmes inlägg i valdebatten mot Thorbjörn Fälldin i Scandinavium, Göteborg, 1976." Licentiate thesis, Örebro University, Department of Humanities, 2007. http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:oru:diva-1528.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract
The topic of the present dissertation is argumentation in the late statesman Olof Palme (1927-1986). One may reasonably think that the fascination for Palme is mainly due to his way of expressing his policy, and therefore also to his argumentation strategy. The theoretical background consists of Lloyd F. Bitzers’s theory on the rhetorical situation, Stephen E. Toulmin’s theory on the description of argumentation structures and on the notion of fallacy, as it appears in pragma-dialectics and informal logic. The rhetorical situation is used to identify vital presuppositions and conditions surrounding the analysed argumentation.Toulmin’s theoretical model is used to analyse structures in the argumentation, and the notion of fallacy is used to discover infringements upon these structures. The object of this analysis is the decisive electoral debates of autumn 1976 between Olof Palme and Thorbjörn Fälldin, held in Scandinavium, Gothenburg, Sweden. Palme had to think of a number of surrounding conditions, such as that the debate was decisive, the composition of the audience. Palme and Fälldin otherwise appeared to be rather equally equipped for the debate. Palme’s task was primarily to gain the number of votes needed to continue to keep social democracy in power. There seem to exist several levels making up his argumentation, grouped under attack and defence. Defence is in most cases based upon a strong connection with the social democrat tradition. The attack is more complicated, linked to Palme’s overall argumentative intention: to depict the non-socialists as a bad governing alternative, and the social democrats as a better one. Fallacies are regarded as instances of breaking the frame of rules that govern a critical discussion. Palme has several fallacy-like features in his argumentation. Among those, most common, are that he attacks the person Thorbjörn Fälldin, instead of the policy or party that he represents. Palme also starts from presupposed premises and tries to link the economic policy of the alliance to an intellectually-thought delimiting between liberal and conservative capitalism and social-democrat solidarity. He strives to portray the liberals and conservatives as money-orientated, whereas social democracy is depicted as people-orientated.Palme goes arguably too far at several moments during the debate,which possibly hurts his own argumentation.
Keywords: Olof Palme, argumentation, argumentation analysis, rhetoric, rhetorical situation, Toulmin´s argumentative model, fallacy, informal logic, pragma-dialectic, critical discussion, debate, Thorbjörn Fälldin, social democracy, election
33
Guillaume, Marine. ""Fighting Justly" in the XXth century : why do weapons disappear from the battlefield ?" Thesis, Paris, Institut d'études politiques, 2015. http://www.theses.fr/2015IEPP0052.
Full textAbstract:
Pourquoi certaines armes disparaissent des champs de bataille tandis que d’autres ne cessent d’y être déployées? Afin de répondre à cette question, notre travail entreprend d’analyser sous un angle inédit l’influence du droit de la guerre (jus in bello) dans le choix des acteurs (gouvernements et militaires) d’utiliser une arme plutôt qu’une autre. Plus précisément, il s’attache à démontrer que les perceptions collectives de ce que proscrit ou autorise le droit de la guerre concernant les conditions d’utilisation des armes (conceptualisées sous le nom de meta-norme du « combattre justement ») est décisif dans la manière qu’ont les acteurs d’appréhender, évaluer et utiliser leur armement. A travers l’analyse des trajectoires de trois armes différentes (armes chimiques, armes incendiaires et drones de combat) fondée sur des données objectives, archives et sources secondaires, nous démontrons que chacun des pics significatifs de l’utilisation de ces armes s’explique aussi par des changements importants dans les perceptions collectives du « combattre justement ». Ainsi, les acteurs cessent d’utiliser leurs armes, ou prétendent cesser, quand ils ne parviennent plus à justifier et démontrer que leur utilisation s’accorde avec leurs perceptions collectives du « combattre justement », et vice versa. In fine, notre travail démontre que la guerre demeure un processus de justification continu, et, parce que les perceptions du combattre justement forment le socle de ces justifications, elles sont décisives pour comprendre le choix des pratiques de guerre. En second lieu, parce que les perceptions collectives du combattre justement sont décisives pour comprendre les pratiques de guerre, notre travail s’intéresse à leur formation. Il démontre que les acteurs sont plus enclins à imposer leur propre perception comme étant la plus légitime lorsque leur argumentaire perpétue un ordre symbolique dominant et ne révèle pas les fondamentales contradictions inhérentes au droit de la guerre. Ainsi, notre travail propose d’analyser sous un nouvel angle l’impact du droit de la guerre, mais aussi celui des argumentaires et des symboles dans les pratiques de guerreThe dissertation investigates why certain weapons continue, or cease to be employed on the battlefields. Employing an interpretivist perspective, it investigates an aspect largely overlooked by the extant literature: the impact of the meta-norm of 'fighting justly' on actors' weapons utilizations. The meta-norm of fighting justly is defined as the collective preconceptions shared by actors, on how and when the extant laws of war (jus in bello) either ban or allow weapons utilization. My work reveals that the significant shift in the utilization of three weapons (chemical weapons, incendiary weapons and unmanned aerial vehicles) can be explained by shifts in the dominant perceptions of the meta-norm of fighting justly. It is when actors believe that they cannot justify their weapons utilization with regards to their own meta-norm of fighting justly, that they decrease (or pretend to decrease by hiding) this utilization, or vice versa. In fine, when engaged in a war, militaries and states constantly seek to justify their actions, and the basis of these justifications is their understanding of the meta-norm of fighting justly. Because the meta-norm of fighting justly impacts on weapons variations, it is crucial to understand who shapes the norm, at the international level. My work reveals that states are engaged in a constant argument, where they defend, articulate and promote their own conception of fighting justly. In this 'battle for legitimacy', states are more likely to enshrine their own conception as the most legitimate one, under two conditions: namely, when their argument does not disrupt the extant symbolic order, and when it does not foster the inherent contradictions of the laws of war. Ultimately, this work aims to shed new light on how the laws of war influence practices of war. It also explores and provides new insights into the 'logic of arguing' and into the symbolic power in international relations
34
Barros, Leandro de. "Pensamento crítico e ensino de filosofia : propostas para a argumentação em sala de aula." reponame:Repositório Institucional da UFABC, 2015.
Find full textAbstract:
Orientadora: Profa. Dra. Patrícia Del Nero VelascoDissertação (mestrado) - Universidade Federal do ABC, Programa De Pós-Graduação em Ensino, História, Filosofia das Ciências e Matemática, 2015.
A obrigatoriedade da Filosofia no Ensino Médio gerou uma série de desafios ao professor e ao poder público, tendo em vista as múltiplas possibilidades de autores e temas que podem ser trabalhados e a realidade da Educação Básica brasileira. O presente trabalho insere-se nas discussões sobre o que e como ensinar Filosofia, atendo-se a uma área pouco explorada nos livros didáticos, a saber, a Lógica. Tendo em vista os objetivos da disciplina Filosofia nos dispositivos legais e o caráter formativo desta, a dissertação estrutura-se da seguinte forma: uma breve apresentação do movimento acadêmico norte-americano intitulado Pensamento Crítico, seguida da exposição de conceitos-chave de lógica argumentativa; uma proposta de atividades envolvendo os conceitos supramencionados, dentro do escopo do referido movimento de Pensamento Crítico, passível de ser desenvolvida nas aulas de Filosofia do Ensino Médio.
The obligation of Philosophy classes in high school in Brazil has generated a series of challenges to the teachers and politicians, once that there are multiples possibilities of authors and themes that can be teached and the problematic reality of the Brazilian public schools. The present work takes part of the discussion about how and what to teach in Philosophy classes. Covering an area not much explored in textbooks, Logic. Placed on the goals of the discipline Philosophy as is based on laws and his formative character, the work is structured as it follows: First, a brief presentation of the north American movement Critical thinking, following by the key concepts of the argumentative Logic, and a proposal of activities involving the concepts above in the context of the Critical Thinking movement, that can be developed in high school's Philosophy classes.
35
Bermejo, Luque Lilian. "Bases filosóficas para una teoría normativa integral de la argumentación. Hacia un enfoque unificado de sus dimensiones lógica, dialéctica y retórica." Doctoral thesis, Universidad de Murcia, 2006. http://hdl.handle.net/10803/10834.
Full textAbstract:
Tras el análisis de las principales teorías de la argumentación contemporáneas, se desarrollan concepciones alternativas de las dimensiones lógica, dialéctica y retórica de la argumentación de cara a la elaboración de una teoría normativa capaz de integrarlas.After the analysis of the main current theories of argumentation, I develop alternative conceptions of the logical, dialectical and rhetorical dimensions of argumentation towards the elaboration of a normative theory of argumentation able to integrate them.
36
Obeidat, Laith Mohammad. "Enhancing the Indoor-Outdoor Visual Relationship: Framework for Developing and Integrating a 3D-Geospatial-Based Inside-Out Design Approach to the Design Process." Diss., Virginia Tech, 2020. http://hdl.handle.net/10919/97726.
Full textAbstract:
This research study aims to enhance the effectiveness of the architectural design process regarding the exploration and framing of the best visual connections to the outside environment within built environments. Specifically, it aims to develop a framework for developing and integrating an inside-out design approach augmented and informed by digital 3D geospatial data as a way to enhance the explorative ability and decision-making process for designers regarding the visual connection to the outside environment. To do so, the strategy of logical argumentation is used to analyze and study the phenomenon of making visual connections to a surrounding context. The initial recommendation of this stage is to integrate an inside-out design approach that operates within the digital immersion within 3D digital representations of the surrounding context. This strategy will help to identify the basic logical steps of the proposed inside-out design process. Then, the method of immersive case study is used to test and further develop a proposed process by designing a specific building, specifically, an Art Museum building on the campus of Virginia Tech. Finally, the Delphi method is used in order to evaluate the necessity and importance of the proposed approach to the design process and its ability to achieve this goal. A multi-round survey was distributed to measure the consensus among a number of experts regarding the proposed design approach and its developed design tool. Overall, findings refer to a total agreement among the participating experts regarding the proposed design approach with some different concerns regarding the proposed design tool.Doctor of Philosophy
Achieving a well-designed visual connection to one's surroundings is considered by many philosophers and theorists to be an essential aspect of our spatial experience within built environments. The goal of this research is to help designers to achieve better visual connections to the outside environment and therefore create more meaningful spatial experiences within the built environment. This research aims to enhance the ability of designers to explore the best possible views and make the right design decisions to frame these views of the outdoors from the inside of their buildings. Of course, the physical presence of designers at a building site has been the traditional method of determining the best views; however, this is not always possible during the design process for many reasons. Thus, this research aims to find a more effective alternative to visiting a building site in order to inform each design decision regarding the quality of its visual connection to the outdoors. To do so, this research developed a proposed inside-out design approach to be integrated into the design process. Specifically, it outlines a process that allows the designers to be digitally immersed within an accurate 3D representation of the surrounding context, which will help designers to explore views from multiple angles both inside the space and in response make the most suitable design decision. For further developing the proposed process, it was used during conducting this research to design an Art Museum on Virginia Tech Campus.
37
Delanlssays, Thomas. "La motivation des décisions juridictionnelles du Conseil d’Etat." Thesis, Lille 2, 2017. http://www.theses.fr/2017LIL20018.
Full textAbstract:
Cette étude se donne pour ambition de saisir et de comprendre ce qu’est la motivation des décisions juridictionnelles du Conseil d’État, au demeurant souvent critiquée. Notion fondamentale en droit processuel, la motivation est un discours argumentatif, expression d’une technique juridique, à savoir un discours visant à justifier au plan juridique et factuel la décision à travers un raisonnement afin de persuader l’auditoire. Ainsi faudra-t-il analyser à la fois son architecture et ses fonctions dans une perspective dynamique. En tout état de cause, on constate,depuis au moins le début du XXIe siècle, une certaine évolution de la motivation. Ce phénomène résulte, notamment, de l’européanisation et de la complexité normatives, de la protection renforcée des droits fondamentaux, des exigences de sécurité juridique ou encore de la volonté du Conseil d’État de promouvoir une politique communicationnelle afin de légitimer son action. L’étude implique de revisiter certaines thématiques traditionnelles, en particulier le syllogismejudiciaire, l’argumentation, l’interprétation, le style de la motivation ou encore le pouvoir normatif jurisprudentiel pour constater et mesurer cette évolutionThe aim of this research is to tackle and understand the Conseil d’Etat’s court’s decisions motivation which are often criticised. Fundamental notion in procedural law, motivation is an argumentative discourse expressing a jurisdictional technique but moreover it is specifically a discourse trying trough a legal reasoning to justify a decision in order to convince the audience. Thus we shall have to analyse its architecture and its functions in a dynamic perspective. Either way we can note that since the beginning of the 21st century the court’s motivation has evolved.This phenomenon is the result of the Europeanization and the complexity of the normative production and is also due to enhanced protection of the fundamental rights, legal certainty and the Conseil d’Etat’s wish to promote a communicational policy in order to legitimise its action. This research entails to revisit certain traditional topics such as jurisdictional syllogism, argumentation, interpretation, the motivation’s style or the normative jurisprudential power to both note and measure this evolution
38
Baumann, Ringo. "On the Existence of Characterization Logics and Fundamental Properties of Argumentation Semantics." 2019. https://ul.qucosa.de/id/qucosa%3A36595.
Full textAbstract:
Given the large variety of existing logical formalisms it is of utmost importance
to select the most adequate one for a specific purpose, e.g. for representing
the knowledge relevant for a particular application or for using the formalism
as a modeling tool for problem solving. Awareness of the nature of a logical
formalism, in other words, of its fundamental intrinsic properties, is indispensable
and provides the basis of an informed choice.
One such intrinsic property of logic-based knowledge representation languages
is the context-dependency of pieces of knowledge. In classical propositional
logic, for example, there is no such context-dependence: whenever two
sets of formulas are equivalent in the sense of having the same models (ordinary
equivalence), then they are mutually replaceable in arbitrary contexts (strong
equivalence). However, a large number of commonly used formalisms are not
like classical logic which leads to a series of interesting developments. It turned
out that sometimes, to characterize strong equivalence in formalism L, we can
use ordinary equivalence in formalism L0: for example, strong equivalence in
normal logic programs under stable models can be characterized by the standard
semantics of the logic of here-and-there. Such results about the existence of
characterizing logics has rightly been recognized as important for the study of
concrete knowledge representation formalisms and raise a fundamental question:
Does every formalism have one? In this thesis, we answer this question
with a qualified “yes”. More precisely, we show that the important case of
considering only finite knowledge bases guarantees the existence of a canonical
characterizing formalism. Furthermore, we argue that those characterizing
formalisms can be seen as classical, monotonic logics which are uniquely determined (up to isomorphism) regarding their model theory.
The other main part of this thesis is devoted to argumentation semantics
which play the flagship role in Dung’s abstract argumentation theory. Almost
all of them are motivated by an easily understandable intuition of what should
be acceptable in the light of conflicts. However, although these intuitions equip
us with short and comprehensible formal definitions it turned out that their
intrinsic properties such as existence and uniqueness, expressibility, replaceability
and verifiability are not that easily accessible. We review the mentioned
properties for almost all semantics available in the literature. In doing so we
include two main axes: namely first, the distinction between extension-based
and labelling-based versions and secondly, the distinction of different kind of
argumentation frameworks such as finite or unrestricted ones.
39
Baumann, Ringo. "Metalogical Contributions to the Nonmonotonic Theory of Abstract Argumentation." Doctoral thesis, 2013. https://ul.qucosa.de/id/qucosa%3A12292.
Full textAbstract:
The study of nonmonotonic logics is one mayor field of Artificial Intelligence (AI). The reason why such kind of formalisms are so attractive to model human reasoning is that they allow to withdraw former conclusion. At the end of the 1980s the novel idea of using argumentation to model nonmonotonic reasoning emerged in AI. Nowadays argumentation theory is a vibrant research area in AI, covering aspects of knowledge representation, multi-agent systems, and also philosophical questions.
Phan Minh Dung’s abstract argumentation frameworks (AFs) play a dominant role in the field of argumentation. In AFs arguments
and attacks between them are treated as primitives, i.e. the
internal structure of arguments is not considered. The major focus is
on resolving conflicts. To this end a variety of semantics have been defined, each of them specifying acceptable sets of arguments, so-called extensions, in a particular way. Although, Dung-style AFs are among the simplest argumentation systems one can think of, this approach is still powerful. It can be seen as a general theory capturing several nonmonotonic formalisms as well as a tool for solving well-known problems as the stable-marriage problem.
This thesis is mainly concerned with the investigation of metalogical
properties of Dung’s abstract theory. In particular, we provide cardinality, monotonicity and splitting results as well as characterization theorems for equivalence notions. The established results have theoretical and practical gains. On the one hand, they yield deeper theoretical insights into how this nonmonotonic theory works, and on the other the obtained results can be used to refine existing algorithms or even give rise to new computational procedures. A further main part is the study of problems regarding dynamic aspects of abstract argumentation. Most noteworthy we solve the so-called enforcing and the more general minimal change problem for a huge number of semantics.
40
Simard, Smith Paul Linton. "Logic In Context: An essay on the contextual foundations of logical pluralism." Thesis, 2013. http://hdl.handle.net/10012/7986.
Full textAbstract:
The core pluralist thesis about logic, broadly construed, is the claim that two or more logics are correct. In this thesis I discuss a uniquely interesting variant of logical pluralism that I call logical contextualism. Roughly, the logical contextualists’ thought is that, for fixed values p and q, the statement “p entails q” and its cognates such as “q is a logical consequence of p” or “the argument from p to q is logically valid,” are true in some contexts and false in others.
After developing a contextualist account of logical pluralism I proceed to examine implications that, if true, logical contextualism would have on discussions about reasonable disagreement among epistemic peers and on discussions about the aim and purpose of argumentation. I show that logical contextualism allows for the possibility of logically-based reasonable disagreements among epistemic peers. In the face of such disagreements there is no obligation to revise one’s belief, nor is there any obligation to degrade the peer status of the agent with whom one stands in disagreement. The possibility of logically-based reasonable disagreements, it will be argued, suggests a reconceptualization of the aims and purpose of argumentation. Most accounts of the purpose of argumentation hold that argumentation’s primary purpose is to achieve rational agreement on a contested issue. Such an agreement is thought to require that at least one of the parties in the argumentation change their beliefs or commitments. However, the existence of logically-based reasonable disagreements, I argue, implies that there are some argumentations that ought not to resolve with agreement. Therefore, rather than understanding argumentation as purely an effort to convince an opponent, or as a means to reach consensus, I claim that argumentation ought to be understood as an effort to gain a better understanding of divergent and perhaps irreconcilable perspectives.
41
Galler, Jayson Scott 1966. "Logic and argumentation in the Book of Concord." Thesis, 2007. http://hdl.handle.net/2152/3474.
Full textAbstract:
The sixteenth-century Reformation in Germany is often viewed as having made a radical change by breaking with the thinking of the past and starting something new. One example given is the Reformation's perceived rejection of philosophy (that is, philosophy's method, subject matter, and purpose), although the regard for philosophy has often been assessed only on the basis of second-order data. Past research has looked at various individuals' keeping or breaking with the preceding era and at the question of continuity between individuals within the Reformation movement of the sixteenth century. This interdisciplinary study examines the regard for philosophy and both the keeping and breaking of the whole movement, by considering how philosophy is used in The Book of Concord, which contains Reformation documents from the earlier and later sixteenth-century that were widely accepted and given authoritative status. The specific Book of Concord uses of philosophy considered are second-order statements about philosophy and its cognates and about logic, as well as first-order uses of organization by [ancient Greek topoi] ("topics") or loci ("places") and of argumentation by both induction (namely, example and analogy) and deduction. The study's taking philosophical uses as indicators of regard for philosophy has been called for in previous research and is relatively unique. Another significant contribution of this study is a detailed treatment of syllogisms used in arguing, for example, for the Reformers' position that justification, or righteousness before God, is only on account of faith in Jesus Christ. The study also considers the Reformers' formal distinction between justification and sanctification, or holy living, as a case study for philosophy in service to theology as its handmaiden in a ministerial role. More than finding an inexplicable, eclectic use, the dissertation concludes that The Book of Concord where necessary rejects philosophy and logic but nevertheless at the same time makes use of them, except where the use of such methods contradicts or goes beyond the Reformers' understanding of God's revelation in the Bible. Such rejection but simultaneous use both keeps and breaks with the preceding medieval period and continuous within the Reformation movement of the sixteenth century.
42
Macedo, Paulo Sérgio Fonseca Santos Pinto. "A Estratégia de Argumentação de António de Oliveira Salazar. Análise de Discurso Político entre 1928 e 1932." Master's thesis, 2019. http://hdl.handle.net/10362/75221.
Full textAbstract:
A presente Dissertação tem como tema a argumentação, centrando-se na definição teórica dos conceitos a ela ligados e na sua aplicação à estratégia argumentativa do antigo ditador e líder de um duradouro regime autoritário em Portugal, António de Oliveira Salazar. A partir dos estudos sobre o discurso, é definido, na parte teórica, o papel da argumentação como tentativa de convencimento e de resolução em ambiente dialógico, em particular nos tipos deliberativo e persuasivo. Esta definição conduz à necessidade de precisão em relação à definição e à constituição de um argumento, diferenciando-o de outras ferramentas usadas em diálogo. Nessa definição, e passando pela diferenciação entre lógica (formal), dialética e retórica como elementos ao dispor da argumentação, é proposta a noção de lógica informal como mais adequada ao contexto de plausibilidade num ambiente de apresentação e troca de argumentos. Identificando a utilidade do uso de argumentos de forma ordenada e intencional, apresenta-se o conceito de esquemas argumentativos e encontra-se uma proposta de classificação e tipificação adaptada ao objeto de estudo prático, explicando cada esquema e traduzindo para Português a sua desconstrução e as questões críticas correspondentes. De uma forma resumida, é ainda apresentado o conceito de estrutura de argumentação e os seus diagramas mais básicos. A dimensão implícita demonstra ser um elemento de importância fundamental para a compreensão e questionamento do discurso, que requereu uma definição específica de dois dos seus instrumentos: as pressuposições e as implicaturas. A partir deste quadro teórico, procede-se à análise dos seis discursos politicamente mais significativos de António de Oliveira Salazar, desde a sua nomeação como Ministro das Finanças, em 1928, até à sua ascensão a Presidente do Conselho, em 1932. Essa análise é realizada, após a apresentação do contexto imediato de cada discurso, a partir da contagem da frequência e da desconstrução dos esquemas argumentativos utilizados, da aferição de uma possível estrutura de argumentação e da identificação e apresentação dos implícitos utilizados pelo ator político, com enfoque nos seus pressupostos. A pergunta de base a que esta Dissertação procura responder refere-se à possibilidade de aferição de um perfil de argumentação em António de Oliveira Salazar, bem como se a sua argumentação contém sinais e teve efeitos na sua ascensão política, sobre o tipo de regime que emergiu da Ditadura Militar e, a existir, qual o peso da dimensão implícita no seu discurso.This thesis focuses on the theme of argumentation and on the definition of the concepts related to it. It also presents its practical application to the study of the argumentation strategies of the former dictator and leader of a long-standing authoritarian regime in Portugal, António de Oliveira Salazar. From the studies on discourse, the theoretical part defines the role of argumentation as an attempt to convince and resolve the interlocutors in a dialogic environment, in particular in the deliberative and persuasive types. This definition leads to the need for precision regarding the definition and constitution of an argument, differentiating it from other tools used in dialogue. In this definition, beyond the differentiation between (formal) logic, dialectic and rhetoric as elements available to argumentation, the notion of informal logic is proposed as more adequate to the context of plausibility in an environment of presentation and exchange of arguments. Identifying the usefulness of the use of arguments in an orderly and intentional way, the concept of argumentative schemes and a proposal of classification and schematization adapted to the object of practical study are presented, explaining each scheme and translating into Portuguese its deconstruction and the corresponding critical questions. The concept of argumentation structure and its most basic diagrams are also presented. The implicit dimension proves to be an element of fundamental importance for the understanding and questioning of discourse, which requires a specific definition of two of its (non)manifestations: presuppositions and implicatures. From this theoretical framework, are analyzed the six most politically significant speeches of Antonio de Oliveira Salazar, from his appointment as Minister of Finance in 1928, until his accession to the Presidency of the Council of Ministers, in 1932. This analysis follows the presentation of the immediate context of each discourse and is based on the study of the frequency and deconstruction of the argumentative schemes, the assessment of a possible structure of argumentation and the identification and presentation of the implicit incidents used by the political actor, focusing on their presuppositions. The basic question to which this thesis seeks to answer refers to the possibility of identifying a profile of argumentation in António de Oliveira Salazar discourse, and whether it is possible to detect signs in his arguments of his political ascent, and the type of regime that emerged from the Military Dictatorship and, if any, determine how they are concealed in the implicit dimension of his discourse.
43
Carnevale, de Almeida Iara. "Distributed Knowledge Bases: a Proposal for Argumentation-based Semantics with Cooperation." Doctoral thesis, 2011. http://hdl.handle.net/10174/2599.
Full textAbstract:
The main objective of this dissertation is to define an argumentation-based negotiation framework for distributed knowledge bases. Knowledge bases are modeling over a multi-agent setting (MAS) such that each agent possibly has an independent or overlapping knowledge base.
This dissertation proposes that agents evaluate arguments to obtain a consensus about a common knowledge by both proposing arguments or trying to build opposing arguments against them. Moreover, this proposal deals with incomplete knowledge (i.e. partial arguments) and so a cooperation process grants arguments to achieve knowledge completeness. Therefore, a negotiation of an agent's belief is seen as an argumentation-based process with cooperation; both cooperation and argumentation are seen as interlaced processes. Furthermore, each agent Ag has both set Argue of argumentative agents and set Cooperate of cooperative agents; every agent Ag must reach a consensus on its arguments with agents in Argue, and Ag may ask for arguments from agents in Cooperate to complete its partial arguments.
The argumentation-based negotiation proposal allows the modeling a hierarchy of knowledge bases representing, for instance, a business's organization or a taxonomy of some subject, and also an MAS where each agent represents "acquired knowledge" in a different period of time. Furthermore, any agent in a MAS can be queried regarding the truth value of some belief. It depends on from which agent such a belief is inferred, and also what the specification in both Argue and Cooperate is, given the overall agents in the MAS. However, such an answer will always be consistent/paraconsistent with agents' knowledge base involved.
This dissertation proposes a (declarative and operational) argumentation semantics for an agent's knowledge base. Furthermore, it proposes a declarative argumentation-based negotiation semantics for a multi-agent setting, which uses most of the definitions from the former semantics.
44
Shim, So Young 1970. "Critical thinking on a logical fallacy." Thesis, 2011. http://hdl.handle.net/2152/ETD-UT-2011-05-3054.
Full textAbstract:
Ad hominem argument is an argument that attacks the defender of a claim rather than the claim in dispute. The purpose of my dissertation is to answer the question of whether ad hominem argument is fallacious. I search for the answer by exploring several areas of philosophy and discussing ad hominem argument from historical, logical, epistemological, and linguistic perspectives. I reach the following conclusions: First, since the conclusion of an ad hominem argument does not appear explicitly in actual argumentation, how to formulate the conclusion plays a crucial role in judging the legitimacy of ad hominem argument; Second, there is no type of logical fallacy unified under the name of “ad hominem” because, at least, some instances of so-called ad hominem fallacy are epistemically justifiable arguments; Third, since an ad hominem argument is used to refute a person’s testimony by attacking his trustworthiness, an ad hominem argument playing a role of undercutting defeater of a speaker’s testimony is legitimate from the perspective of epistemology of testimony; Fourth, since ad hominem argument can be treated as a speech act of argumentation, an ad hominem argument that satisfies the felicity conditions for argumentation is legitimate from the perspective of speech act theory and an ad hominem argument can be legitimately used to reveal the infelicity of the opponent’s argument.text
45
Dixon, Scott Walton. "The theory and pedagody of semantic inconsistency in critical reasoning." Thesis, 2018. http://hdl.handle.net/10500/24927.
Full textAbstract:
One aspect of critical reasoning is the analysis and appraisal of claims and arguments. A typical problem, when analysing and appraising arguments, is inconsistent statements. Although several inconsistencies may have deleterious effects on rationality and action, not all of them do. As educators, we also have an obligation to teach this evaluation in a way that does justice to our normal reasoning practices and judgements of inconsistency. Thus, there is a need to determine the acceptable inconsistencies from those that are not, and to impart that information to students.
We might ask: What is the best concept of inconsistency for critical reasoning and pedagogy? While the answer might appear obvious to some, the history of philosophy shows that there are many concepts of “inconsistency”, the most common of which comes from classical logic and its reliance on opposing truth-values. The current exemplar of this is the standard truth functional account from propositional logic. Initially, this conception is shown to be problematic, practically, conceptually and pedagogically speaking. Especially challenging from the classical perspective are the concepts of ex contradictione quodlibet and ex falso quodlibet. The concepts may poison the well against any notion of inconsistency, which is not something that should be done unreflectively. Ultimately, the classical account of inconsistency is rejected.
In its place, a semantic conception of inconsistency is argued for and demonstrated to handle natural reasoning cases effectively. This novel conception utilises the conceptual antonym theory to explain semantic contrast and gradation, even in the absence of non-canonical antonym pairs. The semantic conception of inconsistency also fits with an interrogative argument model that exploits inconsistency to display semantic contrast in reasons and conclusions. A method for determining substantive inconsistencies follows from this argument model in a
4
straightforward manner. The conceptual fit is then incorporated into the pedagogy of critical reasoning, resulting in a natural approach to reasoning which students can apply to practical matters of everyday life, which include inconsistency. Thus, the best conception of inconsistency for critical reasoning and its pedagogy is the semantic, not the classical.Philosophy Practical and Systematic Theology
D. Phil
46
Nittka, Alexander. "A 3-valued approach to disbelief." 2003. https://ul.qucosa.de/id/qucosa%3A16461.
Full textAbstract:
Es wird eine sprachliche Erweiterung der Aussagenlogik vorgeschlagen. Es handelt sich um eine Art von schwacher Negation ('disbelief'). Eine entsprechende Logik wird entwickelt. Diese wird semantisch charakterisiert. Weiterhin wird auf Schwierigkeiten hingewiesen, die bei der Axiomatisierung auftreten werden.
47
Kulcinski, Arcadi. "Técnicas de Persuasão." Master's thesis, 2014. http://hdl.handle.net/10362/14785.
Full textAbstract:
A presente investigação tem como objetivo principal identificar e explicar as
diversas técnicas de comunicação que poderão ser utilizadas na persuasão e na
manipulação de pensamento, opiniões e disposição para a ação (diathesis) de um
auditório. A partir da exploração da arte de retórica, aplicada à comunicação
interpessoal, assim como aos outros meios de comunicação, sobretudo o audiovisual,
e também na exploração de comunicação não-verbal, pretende-se demostrar e
explicar os diversos métodos e procedimentos de persuasão e de manipulação. Estas
serão divididas em três grupos, cada um referente aos modos de persuasão de
Aristóteles, isto é o ethos, pathos e logos, também designados pelo autor como
“provas técnicas” na sua Techné Rhetoriké, obra inaugural sobre o estudo reflexivo do
que ele designa por “meios persuasivos implicados em cada caso”.
Uma especial atenção é focada nas três técnicas de criação da empatia,
procedimentos essenciais para dispor o auditório perante o orador e para a criação de
culto à personalidade. A interpretação e o desenvolvimento da linguagem corporal é,
sem dúvida uma base importante para toda a comunicação persuasiva e, por isso
mesmo, a maior parte dos procedimentos puramente retóricos serão interlaçados com
a comunicação não-verbal que, segundo algumas estimativas, representa 95% de toda
a comunicação. Não será ousado dizer que a comunicação não-verbal esta já, presente
na interacção entre os animais de uma mesma espécie, designadamente nos rituais de
acasalamento. Por isso, ser-nos-ia impossível ignorar o seu contributo numa
investigação sobre a persuasão e a manipulação no quadro da comunicação
interpessoal.
Como corolário da investigação a desenvolver na presente Dissertação,
procederemos a uma análise empírica das técnicas de persuasão e de manipulação
utilizadas num filme de propaganda de 1934 sobre a Alemanha Nazi da terceira década
do século XX, realizado por Leni Riefenstahl e chamado “O triunfo da vontade”. Propomos, no limite, demonstrar a eficácia performativa da retórica quando, como
acontece no caso estudado, é levada ao limite na sua capacidade de manipulação e
controlo da mente humana. Só que, no caso empírico estudado, não estamos já a falar,
com rigor, da arte retórica tal como foi fundada por Aristóteles e reabilitada por Chaïm
Perelman, mas sim de refinados artifícios retóricos ao serviço da manipulação e
controlo do pensamento. Com esta investigação pretendo demostrar a importância da
comunicação estratégica e tecnicamente estruturada assente nos modos de persuasão
retórica, com a finalidade desta ser eficaz
48
Ansah, Richard. "A critical study of informal fallacies in some socio-political discourse in Ghana." Thesis, 2019. http://hdl.handle.net/10500/27014.
Full textAbstract:
The research undertakes a critical study of informal fallacies in some socio-political and religious discourses in Ghana. It clearly and aptly demonstrates that the aforementioned discourses are mostly, if not, always laced with fallacies which obscure and distort clear and critical thinking. The study shows that language, which is the fundamental means by which to engage in socio-political discourse, can be viewed as a complicated tool which is open to misuse and abuse. It shows that language used in socio-political discourses is more often than not utilized poorly, and as such assertions and appeals can be confused with factual/logical inaccuracies. Statements can be formulated in ways that make their content dangerously vague, ambiguous or generally
misleading.
The research shows that although fallacies can be committed intentionally or unintentionally, in discourses in general, they are mostly, if not always, committed intentionally in socio-political discourse so as to achieve political gains and agenda.
Another area of discourse that is tackled in this work where fallacies frequently occur is the religious sector. The study notes that matters of religion are mostly matters that are delicate to handle as these matters are mostly, again if not always, based on faith. It is shown herein that many a time, religious personalities use fallacious as means to drive
their religious agenda across.
The research then looks at what these aforementioned fallacies imply in relation to socio-political and religious discourses. It proceeds to discuss the positive implications of fallacies before it progresses to the negative implications of same. It then asks how a fallacy will be beneficial to a person and or how it will disadvantage the same person. If fallacies often occur in socio-political and religious discourses, then one must have the ability to detect these fallacies and try to avoid them. The work discusses how to detect fallacies and how to avoid them. It makes bold claims that if one has knowledge about
fallacies then one will be able to avoid them.Philosophy, Practical and Systematic Theology
Ph. D. (Philosophy)
49
Bruxel, Laerson. "Democracia, Deliberação e Mídia na Esfera Pública Contemporânea: um Estudo sobre Experiênciasa Referendárias no Brasil e em Portugal." Doctoral thesis, 2011. http://hdl.handle.net/10316/20165.
Full textAbstract:
Tese de doutoramento em Altos Estudos Contemporâneos, na especialidade de Ciência Política (História Política e Estudos Internacionais), apresentada à Faculdade de Economia da Universidade de CoimbraA presente investigação analisa e compara material publicado por dois jornais, – Folha de São Paulo, do Brasil, e Público, de Portugal -, sobre referendos realizados nos dois países, respectivamente, em 2005 e 2007. O objetivo é verificar se nesse material há falas com argumentos que possam ser considerados úteis para contribuir com um processo deliberativo, na perspectiva da democracia defendida por Jürgen Habermas. Ancorado numa sugestão de Simone Chambers, o material jornalístico é classificado como retórica plebiscitária ou retórica deliberativa. A retórica plebiscitária se caracteriza pela presença de mais elementos que não contribuem para a realização de uma deliberação pública, enquanto a deliberativa contém significativa presença de subsídios considerados importantes para o desenvolvimento desse processo. O reforço de alguns elementos no material jornalístico, – e a investigação avalia e quantifica quais elementos a mídia privilegia -, pode fazer com que se aproxime ou se distancie daquilo que é qualificado como importante para um debate público numa perspectiva habermasiana. A decisão de acionar mais um ou outro elemento está entre as opções que a mídia faz. Ao optar, ela sai de uma zona de fronteira, com várias possibilidades em aberto, e realiza um processo de demarcação. E, ao demarcar, ela estabelece limites, seja para um ou para outro processo. Considerando que a mídia tem potenciais ambivalentes, a investigação assume este pressuposto: não é possível definir a priori o papel que a mídia desempenha em eventos específicos de deliberação pública, como no caso dos referendos, isto porque em seu material comparecem todos os elementos da retórica, tanto os tendentes a favorecer como aqueles que prejudicam um processo deliberativo. Mas dada sua lógica de produção e divulgação, ela revela alguns dos seus limites que a impedem de complexificar os temas da agenda pública. E a hipótese que se assume nesta tese é que as escolhas da mídia privilegiam mais os elementos da retórica que se coadunam com a lógica da evidência, que é refratária a um processo argumentativo. Por acionar em maior número os elementos que são limitadores de um processo argumentativo, é temerário apontar a mídia como fórum central para a deliberação pública. E, se o seu poder de abrangência pode ser tomado como potencialmente útil para a realização de processos deliberativos nas democracias contemporâneas, a simples disponibilidade desse dispositivo não permite chegar à conclusão açodada de que sua prática contribua efetivamente para o desenvolvimento do debate público. Pelo seu potencial, e por permitir que em seu interior também circule material identificado como uma retórica deliberativa, até pode-se ver na mídia um ator capacitado a realizar um papel complementar, mas não central, no processo mais amplo da deliberação pública. E, nessa linha de análise, não se pode descartar por completo a possibilidade de o material produzido pela mídia ser desencadeador de um processo deliberativo na sociedade ao ser apropriado ou reinterpretado de diferentes maneiras pelos diversos atores da esfera pública.