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

Arts and Humanities Commons

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

Philosophy

SelectedWorks

Logical Argument Mapping, Argument Visualization, and Argumentation Theory

Articles 1 - 8 of 8

Full-Text Articles in Arts and Humanities

Changing Philosophy Through Technology: Complexity And Computer-Supported Collaborative Argument Mapping (Pre-Print), Michael H.G. Hoffmann Jan 2015

Changing Philosophy Through Technology: Complexity And Computer-Supported Collaborative Argument Mapping (Pre-Print), Michael H.G. Hoffmann

Michael H.G. Hoffmann

Technology is not only an object of philosophical reflection but also something that can change this reflection. This paper discusses the potential of computer-supported argument visualization tools for coping with the complexity of philosophical arguments. I will show, in particular, how the interactive and web-based argument mapping software “AGORA-net” can change the practice of philosophical reflection, communication, and collaboration. AGORA-net allows the graphical representation of complex argumentations in logical form and the synchronous and asynchronous collaboration on those “argument maps” on the internet. Web-based argument mapping can overcome limits of space, time, and access, and it can empower users from …


Argument Map: Deductive Argument Visualization Stimulates Reflection On Implicit Background Assumptions, Michael Hoffmann Dec 2014

Argument Map: Deductive Argument Visualization Stimulates Reflection On Implicit Background Assumptions, Michael Hoffmann

Michael H.G. Hoffmann

This argument map justifies the claim that using only deductive argument schemes in computer-supported argument visualization stimulates reflection on some of one's implicit background assumptions.


Why The Presentation Of Arguments In Logical Form Has Advantages, Michael H.G. Hoffmann Jan 2013

Why The Presentation Of Arguments In Logical Form Has Advantages, Michael H.G. Hoffmann

Michael H.G. Hoffmann

An argument map, created in AGORA-net, that justifies the claim that the representation of arguments in logical or deductive form has advantages (zoom in to read it).


Powerful Arguments: Logical Argument Mapping, Michael H.G. Hoffmann Jan 2011

Powerful Arguments: Logical Argument Mapping, Michael H.G. Hoffmann

Michael H.G. Hoffmann

This paper argues that deductive arguments are "powerful" when the goal is to stimulate reflection on one's own reasoning. Powerful arguments are defined as arguments that leave only one choice for a potential opponent: either to accept the conclusion or to defeat one of its premises. In the first part, the paper presents an argument for the thesis that so defined powerful arguments are possible when we do not only provide reasons as premises of an argument, but also what is called an "enabler." An "enabler" is that premise in an argument that guarantees that the reason provided in this …


Cognitive Effects Of Argument Visualization Tools, Michael H.G. Hoffmann Jan 2011

Cognitive Effects Of Argument Visualization Tools, Michael H.G. Hoffmann

Michael H.G. Hoffmann

External representations play a crucial role in learning. At the same time, cognitive load theory suggests that the possibility of learning depends on limited resources of the working memory and on cognitive load imposed by instructional design and representation tools. Both these observations motivate a critical look at Computer-Supported Argument Visualization (CSAV) tools that are supposed to facilitate learning. This paper uses cognitive load theory to compare the cognitive efficacy of RationaleTM 2 and AGORA.


Analyzing Framing Processes In Conflicts And Communication By Means Of Logical Argument Mapping, Michael H.G. Hoffmann Jan 2011

Analyzing Framing Processes In Conflicts And Communication By Means Of Logical Argument Mapping, Michael H.G. Hoffmann

Michael H.G. Hoffmann

The primary goal of this chapter is to present a new method—called Logical Argument Mapping (LAM)—for the analysis of framing processes as they occur in any communication, but especially in conflicts. I start with a distinction between boundary setting, meaning construction, and sensemaking as three forms or aspects of framing, and argue that crucial for the resolution of frame-based controversies is our ability to deal with those “webs” of mutually supporting beliefs that determine sensemaking processes. Since any analysis of framing in conflicts and communication is itself influenced by sensemaking—there is no “frame-neutrality”—the main problem for an analyst is to …


Limits Of Truth: Exploring Epistemological Approaches To Argumentation, Michael H.G. Hoffmann Jan 2005

Limits Of Truth: Exploring Epistemological Approaches To Argumentation, Michael H.G. Hoffmann

Michael H.G. Hoffmann

Some proponents of epistemological approaches to argumentation (Biro, Siegel, Lumer, Goldman) assume that it should be possible to develop non-relative criteria of argument evaluation. By contrast, this paper argues that any evaluation of an argument depends (a) on the cognitive situation of the evaluator, (b) on background knowledge that is available for this evaluator in a certain situation, and (c)—in some cases—on the belief-value-system this person shares.


Logical Argument Mapping: A Method For Overcoming Cognitive Problems Of Conflict Management, Michael H.G. Hoffmann Jan 2005

Logical Argument Mapping: A Method For Overcoming Cognitive Problems Of Conflict Management, Michael H.G. Hoffmann

Michael H.G. Hoffmann

A crucial problem of conflict management is that whatever happens in negotiations will be interpreted and framed by stakeholders based on their different belief-value systems and world views. This problem will be discussed in the first part of this article as the main cognitive problem of conflict management. The second part develops a general semiotic solution of this problem, based on Charles Peirce's concept of "diagrammatic reasoning." The basic idea is that by representing one 's thought in diagrams, the conditions that determine interpretations can become visible, we can "experiment" with them, and we can change them eventually. The third …