Reply To Commentary On “Argumentation Mining In Parliamentary Discourse”,
2016
University of Toronto
Reply To Commentary On “Argumentation Mining In Parliamentary Discourse”, Nona Naderi
OSSA Conference Archive
No abstract provided.
Reply To Commentary On “Transsubjectivity”,
2016
McMaster University
Reply To Commentary On “Transsubjectivity”, David Hitchcock
OSSA Conference Archive
No abstract provided.
Reply To Commentary On Constructing A Periodic Table Of Arguments,
2016
University of Amsterdam
Reply To Commentary On Constructing A Periodic Table Of Arguments, Jean H.M. Wagemans
OSSA Conference Archive
No abstract provided.
Commentary On “America Vs. Apple: The Argumentative Function Of Metonyms”: Defeasible Rhetoric: Networks, Security, & Metonyms,
2016
University of Southern California
Commentary On “America Vs. Apple: The Argumentative Function Of Metonyms”: Defeasible Rhetoric: Networks, Security, & Metonyms, G Thomas Goodnight
OSSA Conference Archive
The government took Apple to court to demand decryption of a terrorist cell phone. The warrant issued rested on the assumption that law enforcement should be able to do its work through extension of “access” across the population of encrypted iphones. Each phone exists as a defeasible (Rescher 1977) site whose cooperation (access) is assumed to be opened by the the manufacturer if directed to do so by government, unless cause can be shown otherwise. Defeasible argument couples rhetorically with metonymic force as a powerful argument trajectory. The reversal of burden of proof, now placed on the company to …
Commentary On “Objectivity In Newsmaking: An Argumentative Perspective”: Reflections On Argument In Practice,
2016
Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, School of Communications & Information
Commentary On “Objectivity In Newsmaking: An Argumentative Perspective”: Reflections On Argument In Practice, Mark Aakhus
OSSA Conference Archive
No abstract provided.
When Different Perspectives Interact: A Historical Account Of Informal Logic Between 1983 And 1987,
2016
Showa Women's University
When Different Perspectives Interact: A Historical Account Of Informal Logic Between 1983 And 1987, Takuzo Konishi
OSSA Conference Archive
This paper will describe what happened to the community of informal logicians between 1983 and 1987, when they started to interact with communication scholars, rhetoricians and Pragma-Dialecticians. Special attention will be paid to key events, such as the Second International Symposiums on Informal Logic (SISIL), the founding of AILACT (Association for Informal Logic and Critical Thinking) in 1983, the start of journal Informal logic in 1984, and the international conference on argumentation held at Amsterdam in 1986.
Commentary On Sheldon Wein's "Biases, Bumps, Nudges, Query Lists, And Zero Tolerance Policies",
2016
University of Toronto
Commentary On Sheldon Wein's "Biases, Bumps, Nudges, Query Lists, And Zero Tolerance Policies", Derek Allen
OSSA Conference Archive
No abstract provided.
Commentary On “Argumentation Mining In Parliamentary Discourse”,
2016
University of Fraser Valley
Commentary On “Argumentation Mining In Parliamentary Discourse”, Moira Kloster
OSSA Conference Archive
No abstract provided.
Commentary On Scott Aikin, “A Modest Defense Of Fallacy Theory”,
2016
Universität Hamburg
Commentary On Scott Aikin, “A Modest Defense Of Fallacy Theory”, Harald R. Wohlrapp
OSSA Conference Archive
Fallacy theory has not been my particular concern until now – even if I spoke here and there about fallacies; mainly about the two specimens which I consider to be of the highest importance for argumentation theory. I mean “Ad baculum” and “Begging the question”. In fact I was not aware that a defense of fallacy theory was necessary because I had taken the criticisms of late to be mainly relying on a lack of clarity, confusion and exaggeration. Despite this estimation I will begin with stating that I agree with most of Aikin’s well minded proposals and solutions. Nevertheless …
Background Nonverbal Disagreement During Televised Political Debates: A Strategic Maneuvering Approach,
2016
University of Central Florida
Background Nonverbal Disagreement During Televised Political Debates: A Strategic Maneuvering Approach, Harry Weger Jr., Edward Hinck, John Seiter
OSSA Conference Archive
Since the 1960 Kennedy-Nixon presidential debates, interest in the impact of televised debates on political campaigns has grown steadily among scholars of argumentation and rhetorical communication. In addition to communicating policy positions of a candidate, televised debates provide the voting public one of the few opportunities to build or solidify impressions of candidates based on a (at least semi-) spontaneous social performance in which candidates meet face-to-face to discuss their differences. The strategies candidates use to communicate their policies and their desired image during a debate can influence the direction of public opinion toward them. We claim in this essay …
Commentary On Jan Albert Van Laar And Erik C. W. Krabbe, “Splitting A Difference Of Opinion”,
2016
Michigan State University
Commentary On Jan Albert Van Laar And Erik C. W. Krabbe, “Splitting A Difference Of Opinion”, David Godden
OSSA Conference Archive
Jan Albert van Laar and Erik Krabbe’s paper “Splitting a difference of opinion” studies an important type of dialogue shift, namely that from a deliberation dialogue over action or policy options where critical and persuasive argumentation is exchanged about the rational acceptability of the policy options proposed by various parties, to a negotiation dialogue where agreement is reached by a series of compromises, or trade-offs, on the part of each side in the disagreement.
Commentary On “The Stance Of Personal Public Apology”: Transgression & Apologia: Disjoining Standpoints Of Justice, Publicity And Drama,
2016
University of Southern California
Commentary On “The Stance Of Personal Public Apology”: Transgression & Apologia: Disjoining Standpoints Of Justice, Publicity And Drama, G Thomas Goodnight
OSSA Conference Archive
This paper responds to Professor Martha Cheng’s standpoint analysis of transgression and apologia in three twenty first century media-promoted controversies: Tiger Woods, Paula Deen, and Bryan Williams. Argument strategies are differentiated by genres that aim at justice, publicity, and drama. Forensics, public relations, and entertainment mix across media apparatus. I emphasize the disjunctures among these acts of argument and thereby provide an alternative to analysis and synthesis of the argumentation as discourse.
Agnotology And Argumentation: A Rhetorical Taxonomy Of Not-Knowing,
2016
University of Windsor, Graduate Student, Department of Philosophy
Agnotology And Argumentation: A Rhetorical Taxonomy Of Not-Knowing, Blake D. Scott
OSSA Conference Archive
This paper attempts to integrate an agnotological taxonomy of “not-knowing” with argumentation theory. Given rhetoric’s emphasis on what arguers choose to make present for their audience, it is argued that the rhetorical approach is best suited to accommodate the proposed taxonomy. In doing so we can improve the capacities of both arguers and audiences to detect adverse elements such as prejudices, implicit biases, and ideologies, which can restrict an argument’s claim to objectivity.
Commentary On Harry Weger, Edward Hinck And John Seiter’S Background Nonverbal Disagreement During Televised Political Debates: A Strategic Maneuvering Approach,
2016
Universidade Nova de Lisboa
Commentary On Harry Weger, Edward Hinck And John Seiter’S Background Nonverbal Disagreement During Televised Political Debates: A Strategic Maneuvering Approach, Dima Mohammed
OSSA Conference Archive
No abstract provided.
Commentary On: John Fields’S “Objectivity, Autonomy, And The Use Of Arguments From Authority”,
2016
University of Nevada, Las Vegas
Commentary On: John Fields’S “Objectivity, Autonomy, And The Use Of Arguments From Authority”, Maurice A. Finocchiaro
Philosophy Faculty Research
No abstract provided.
Communicating Who Knows What In Sustainability Science: Investigating The Role Of Epistemology In Science Communication And Engagement,
2016
University of Maine
Communicating Who Knows What In Sustainability Science: Investigating The Role Of Epistemology In Science Communication And Engagement, Brianne M. Suldovsky
Electronic Theses and Dissertations
The complex socio-ecological problems we face today often require that researchers collaborate with individuals and organizations outside of their own disciplines and, oftentimes, outside of academia entirely. This sustainability science model encourages university researchers to engage in participatory models of engagement, where nonscientific publics and scientists working outside of academe are invited to co-produce knowledge and, through collaboration, arrive at solutions for sustainability. Despite the popularity of participatory models of engagement in sustainability science, very little research has examined sustainability science researchers’ perceptions of epistemic authority in conjunction with their engagement behavior. This kind of work is important given that …
Solution Of The Disclosure Problem,
2016
St. John's University School of Law
Solution Of The Disclosure Problem, William F. Cahill, B.A., Ll.B., J.C.D.
The Catholic Lawyer
No abstract provided.
The Problem Case - Disclosure,
2016
St. John's University School of Law
Immigration - A Legal And Moral Problem,
2016
St. John's University School of Law
Immigration - A Legal And Moral Problem, Joseph T. Tinnelly, C.M.
The Catholic Lawyer
No abstract provided.
It's Always Better With A Good Dm,
2016
University of New Orleans, New Orleans
It's Always Better With A Good Dm, David Colannino
University of New Orleans Theses and Dissertations
It’s Always Better With A Good DM is about our relationship with objects and maps as a vector for fantasy. Beginning from the premise that humans understand the world via narrative, I am concerned with the loss of imagination in adulthood in lieu of ideology, which is no more real than stories of future and fantastic places.
