Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Arts and Humanities Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Philosophy

Conference

OSSA Conference Archive

2013

Audience

Articles 1 - 3 of 3

Full-Text Articles in Arts and Humanities

Some Practical Values Of Argumentation, Laura M. Benacquista May 2013

Some Practical Values Of Argumentation, Laura M. Benacquista

OSSA Conference Archive

In this paper, I identify two sets of practical values of argumentation from a standpoint that places a premium on maximal participatory democracy. The first set includes pedagogical values for both teachers and learners. The second set of values are transformative and include: facilitating openness as both tolerance and opportunity; facilitating understanding of one’s own positions, other’s positions, and the conceptual frameworks underlying them; and, finally, fostering motivation by encouraging action.


Arguing Or Reasoning? Argumentation In Rhetorical Context, Manfred Kraus May 2013

Arguing Or Reasoning? Argumentation In Rhetorical Context, Manfred Kraus

OSSA Conference Archive

If dialogue is a necessary condition for argument, argumentation in oratory becomes questionable, since rhetoric is not a dialogically structured activity. If special norms apply to the ‘solo’ performances of rhetoric, the orator’s activity may be more appropriately described as reasoning than as arguing. By analyzing in what respect rhetorical texts can be interpreted as dialogue-based and subject to criteria of Informal Logic, the virtues of rhetorical argumentation in contrast to logic and dialectic emerge.


How To Formalize Informal Logic, Douglas Walton, Thomas F. Gordon May 2013

How To Formalize Informal Logic, Douglas Walton, Thomas F. Gordon

OSSA Conference Archive

This paper presents a formalization of informal logic using the Carneades Argumentation System, a formal, computational model of argument that consists of a formal model of argument graphs and audiences. Conflicts between pro and con arguments are resolved using proof standards, such as preponderance of the evidence. Carneades also formalizes argumentation schemes. Schemes can be used to check whether a given argument instantiates the types of argument deemed normatively appropriate for the type of dialogue.