Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Keyword
-
- N/A (31)
- Argumentation (11)
- Rhetoric (6)
- Argument (5)
- Critical thinking (4)
-
- Democracy (4)
- Pragma-dialectics (4)
- Trust (3)
- Advocacy (2)
- Argumentation theory (2)
- Audience (2)
- Cognitive biases (2)
- Defeasible (2)
- Dialectic (2)
- Fallacies (2)
- Informal logic (2)
- Logic (2)
- Narrative (2)
- Proof (2)
- Relevance (2)
- Sufficiency (2)
- Virtue (2)
- Warrant (2)
- Wittgenstein (2)
- (rational) persuasion. (1)
- A posteriori (1)
- A priori (1)
- ASAC Protocol (1)
- Abduction (1)
- Abductive reasoning (1)
Articles 1 - 30 of 94
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
Rotman Institute Speaker: Feminist Neo-Materialism And The Future Of Phenomenology, Dorothea Olkowski
Rotman Institute Speaker: Feminist Neo-Materialism And The Future Of Phenomenology, Dorothea Olkowski
Future Directions in Feminist Phenomenology
No abstract provided.
Integrating Natural Language Processing And Pragmatic Argumentation Theories For Argumentation Support, Mark Aaknus, Smaranda Muresan, Nina Wacholder
Integrating Natural Language Processing And Pragmatic Argumentation Theories For Argumentation Support, Mark Aaknus, Smaranda Muresan, Nina Wacholder
OSSA Conference Archive
Natural language processing (NLP) research and design that aims to model and detect opposition in text for the purpose of opinion classification, sentiment analysis, and meeting tracking, generally excludes the interactional, pragmatic aspects of online text. We propose that a promising direction for NLP is to incorporate the insights of pragmatic, dialectical theories of argumentation to more fully exploit the potential of NLP to offer sound, robust systems for various kinds of argumentation support.
Don't Feed The Trolls: Straw Men And Iron Men, Scott Aikin, John Casey
Don't Feed The Trolls: Straw Men And Iron Men, Scott Aikin, John Casey
OSSA Conference Archive
The straw man fallacy consists in inappropriately constructing or selecting weak (or comparatively weaker) versions of the opposition's arguments. We will survey the three forms of straw men recognized in the literature, the straw, weak, and hollow man. We will then make the case that there are examples of inappropriately reconstructing stronger versions of the opposition's arguments. Such cases we will call iron man fallacies.
Commentary On: Andrew Aberdein's "Fallacy And Argumentational Vice", Maurice A. Finocchiaro
Commentary On: Andrew Aberdein's "Fallacy And Argumentational Vice", Maurice A. Finocchiaro
OSSA Conference Archive
N/A
Pistis - The Common Ethos?, Anne-Maren Andersen
Pistis - The Common Ethos?, Anne-Maren Andersen
OSSA Conference Archive
The classical Greek term pistis (trust) is presented as a relevant norm in the analysis of parliamentary debate. Through exploration of pistis apparent similarities to the term ethos have appeared. It is proposed that pistis can be viewed as the equivalent to ethos, concerning the common space or connection between the speaker and the audience. Tentatively "truth", "faith" and "respect" are proposed as the elements equivalent to phronesis, areté and eunoia.
Dialectic Of/Or Agitation? Rethinking Argumentative Virtues In Proletarian Elocution, Satoru Aonuma
Dialectic Of/Or Agitation? Rethinking Argumentative Virtues In Proletarian Elocution, Satoru Aonuma
OSSA Conference Archive
This paper explores the possible rapprochement between Marxism and argumentation attempted in Proletarian Elocution, a 1930 Japanese publication. Against a Western Marxist commonplace that “[a]s far as rhetoric is concerned,… a Marxist must be in a certain sense a Platonist” (Eagleton, 1981), the paper discusses how this work seeks to takes advantage of the inquiry and advocacy dimensions of argumentation for the Marxian strategy of “agitprop” and rearticulate it as part of civic virtues.
Identifying Argumentative Acts Within The Classroom Amongst Engineering Students, Juan Fernando Barros-Martinez
Identifying Argumentative Acts Within The Classroom Amongst Engineering Students, Juan Fernando Barros-Martinez
OSSA Conference Archive
Students’ arguments surrounding a scientific topic are analyzed. This analysis comes from research developed in the classroom where dialogic interaction was promoted. The purpose of this study has not only been to identify argumentative elements used by students during the sessions but principally to the process of discussion. Three different ways have been proposed for this analysis: speech acts, acts of argumentative process and acts of learning process, with the intention of establishing relationships between them.
Critical Thinking And Cognitive Biases, Mark Battersby, Sharon Bailin
Critical Thinking And Cognitive Biases, Mark Battersby, Sharon Bailin
OSSA Conference Archive
We argue that psychological research can enhance the identification of reasoning errors and the development of an appropriate pedagogy to instruct people in how to avoid these errors. In this paper we identify some of the findings of psychologists that help explain some common fallacies, give examples of fallacies identified in the research that have not been typically identified in philosophy, and explore ways in which this research can enhance critical thinking instruction.
Commentary On: Mark Battersby And Sharon Bailin's "Critical Thinking And Cognitive Biases", Frank Zenker
Commentary On: Mark Battersby And Sharon Bailin's "Critical Thinking And Cognitive Biases", Frank Zenker
OSSA Conference Archive
N/A
Some Practical Values Of Argumentation, Laura M. Benacquista
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.
Assessing Presumptions In Argumentation: Being A Sound Presumption Vs. Being Presumably The Case, Lilian Bermejo-Luque
Assessing Presumptions In Argumentation: Being A Sound Presumption Vs. Being Presumably The Case, Lilian Bermejo-Luque
OSSA Conference Archive
This paper is an attempt to identify and provide the normative conditions for presumptions and for presumptive inferences. Basically, the idea is adopting the distinction between epistemic and ontological qualifiers proposed in Bermejo-Luque (2011) in order to explain the difference between something being a correct presumption and something being presumably the case.
The Epistemic Approach To Argument Evaluation: Virtues, Beliefs, Commitments, Patrick Bondy
The Epistemic Approach To Argument Evaluation: Virtues, Beliefs, Commitments, Patrick Bondy
OSSA Conference Archive
This paper will have two parts. In the first, it will point out the agreement between lists of paradigm epistemic and argumentative virtues, and it will take that agreement as prima facie support for the epistemic approach to argument evaluation. Second, it will consider the disagreement over whether successful argument resolution requires change of belief or whether it only requires change of commitment. It turns out that the epistemic approach is neutral on that question.
Commentary On: Tracy Bowell And Justine Kingsbury's "Critical Thinking And The Argumentational And Epistemic Virtues", Donald Hatcher
Commentary On: Tracy Bowell And Justine Kingsbury's "Critical Thinking And The Argumentational And Epistemic Virtues", Donald Hatcher
OSSA Conference Archive
N/A
Commentary On: Chris Campolo's "Argumentative Virtues And Deep Disagreement", David M. Godden
Commentary On: Chris Campolo's "Argumentative Virtues And Deep Disagreement", David M. Godden
OSSA Conference Archive
N/A
The Practice Of Arguing And The Arguments: Examples From Mathematics, Begoῆa Carrascal
The Practice Of Arguing And The Arguments: Examples From Mathematics, Begoῆa Carrascal
OSSA Conference Archive
In argumentation studies, almost all theoretical proposals are applied, in general, to the analysis and evaluation of written argumentative texts. I will consider mathematics to illustrate some differences between argumentative practice and the products of it, to emphasize the need to address the different types of argumentative discourse and argumentative situation. Argumentative practice should be encouraged when teaching technical subjects to convey a better understanding and to improve thought and creativity.
Commentary On: Begoῆa Carrascal's "The Practice Of Arguing And The Arguments: Examples From Mathematics", Andrew Aberdein
Commentary On: Begoῆa Carrascal's "The Practice Of Arguing And The Arguments: Examples From Mathematics", Andrew Aberdein
OSSA Conference Archive
N/A
Commentary On: Ian Dove's "Visual Arguments And Meta-Arguments", Jens E. Kjeldsen
Commentary On: Ian Dove's "Visual Arguments And Meta-Arguments", Jens E. Kjeldsen
OSSA Conference Archive
N/A
Commentary On: Ionana Cionea, Dale Hample, And Edward Fink's "Dialogue Types: A Scale Development Study", Douglas Walton
Commentary On: Ionana Cionea, Dale Hample, And Edward Fink's "Dialogue Types: A Scale Development Study", Douglas Walton
OSSA Conference Archive
N/A
Visual Arguments And Meta-Arguments, Ian J. Dove
Visual Arguments And Meta-Arguments, Ian J. Dove
OSSA Conference Archive
Visual arguments—arguments that appeal to visual elements essentially—are legitimate arguments. To show this, I first consider what I call (perfect) fit arguments—arguments in which the recognition that items fit together suggests that they were once conjoined, perhaps originally. This form of argumentation is a type of abduction or inference to the best explanation (IBE). I then consider mathematical visual meta-arguments—arguments in which the validity or soundness of a mathematical argument is confirmed or refuted by appeal to diagrams.
Argument And Explanation In Mathematics, Michel Dufour
Argument And Explanation In Mathematics, Michel Dufour
OSSA Conference Archive
Are there arguments in mathematics? Are there explanations in mathematics? Are there any connections between argument, proof and explanation? Highly controversial answers and arguments are reviewed. The main point is that in the case of a mathematical proof, the pragmatic criterion used to make a distinction between argument and explanation is likely to be insufficient for you may grant the conclusion of a proof but keep on thinking that the proof is not explanatory.
Commentary On: Michel Dufour's "Argument And Explanation In Mathematics", Andrew Aberdein
Commentary On: Michel Dufour's "Argument And Explanation In Mathematics", Andrew Aberdein
OSSA Conference Archive
N/A
Commentary On: Frans H. Van Eemeren And Bart Garssen's "Argumentative Patterns In Discourse", G. Thomas Goodnight
Commentary On: Frans H. Van Eemeren And Bart Garssen's "Argumentative Patterns In Discourse", G. Thomas Goodnight
OSSA Conference Archive
N/A
Critical Thinking Across The Curriculum (Ctac), Robert H. Ennis
Critical Thinking Across The Curriculum (Ctac), Robert H. Ennis
OSSA Conference Archive
Implementing critical thinking across the curriculum is challenging, involving securing substantial agreement on the nature of critical thinking, areas of prospective application (subject matter? everyday life?), degree of need for a separate course, and the nature of coordination, including leadership, a glossary, selection of courses for incorporation, avoidance of duplication and gaps, acquiring required subject matter, and assessment of the total effort, teaching methods used, and decrease or increase in retention of subject matter.
Commentary On: Robert H. Ennis' "Critical Thinking Across The Curriculum (Ctac)", Mark Battersby
Commentary On: Robert H. Ennis' "Critical Thinking Across The Curriculum (Ctac)", Mark Battersby
OSSA Conference Archive
N/A
The Virtues Of Dissoi Logoi, Victor Ferry
The Virtues Of Dissoi Logoi, Victor Ferry
OSSA Conference Archive
My claim is that rhetorical training is required to develop citizenship skills. I illustrate this claim by focussing on dissociation of notions, that is, a rhetorical technique that citizens might have to use in their civic life. After distinguishing a rhetorical and a normative approach to dissociation, I argue that dissoi logoi, as an exercise invented by the Sophists, offer a relevant training to master this technique.
The Fallacy Of Composition And Meta-Argumentation, Maurice A. Finocchiaro
The Fallacy Of Composition And Meta-Argumentation, Maurice A. Finocchiaro
OSSA Conference Archive
Although the fallacy of composition is little studied and trivially illustrated, some view it as ubiquitous and paramount. Furthermore, although definitions regard the concept as unproblematic, it contains three distinct elements, often confused. And although some scholars apparently claim that fallacies are figments of a critic’s imagination, they are really proposing to study fallacies in the context of meta-argumentation. Guided by these ideas, I discuss the important historical example of Michels’s iron law of oligarchy.
What Types Of Arguments Are There?, James B. Freeman
What Types Of Arguments Are There?, James B. Freeman
OSSA Conference Archive
Our typology is based on two ground adequacy factors, one logical and one epistemic. Logically, the step from premises to conclusion may be conclusive or only ceteris paribus. Epistemically, warrants may be backed a priori or a posteriori. Hence there are four types of arguments: conclusive a priori, defeasible a priori, defeasible a posteriori, and prima facie conclusive a posteriori. We shall give an example of each and compare our scheme with other typologies.
Emotion As Permeative: Attempting To Model The Unidentifiable, Michael A. Gilbert
Emotion As Permeative: Attempting To Model The Unidentifiable, Michael A. Gilbert
OSSA Conference Archive
The question of emotion in argumentation has received considerable attention in recent years. But there is a tension between the traditional normative role of informal logic, and the inclusion of emotion which is viewed as notoriously unstable. Here I argue that that, a] there is always emotion in an argument; b] that the presence of emotion is a good thing; and c] that we can and ought model and teach the use of emotion in Argumentation Theory.
On The Norms Of Visual Argument, David M. Godden
On The Norms Of Visual Argument, David M. Godden
OSSA Conference Archive
While pictures can persuade, can they do so rationally – by offering reasons? Existing debate has focused on whether images are – or can be – arguments. Yet, from a normative perspective, a more pressing question concerns how the persuasive operation of images ought to be evaluated. By analyzing the concept of argument as necessarily involving reasons the paper argues that the possibility of visual arguments requires no revision to our existing normative theories of argument.
Measuring Critical Thinking About Deeply Held Beliefs, Ilan Goldberg, Justine Kingsbury, Tracy Bowell
Measuring Critical Thinking About Deeply Held Beliefs, Ilan Goldberg, Justine Kingsbury, Tracy Bowell
OSSA Conference Archive
The California Critical Thinking Dispositions Inventory (CCTDI) is a commonly used tool for measuring critical thinking dispositions. However, research on the efficacy of the CCTDI in predicting good thinking about students’ own deeply held beliefs is scant. In this paper we report on preliminary results from our ongoing study designed to gauge the usefulness of the CCTDI in this context.