Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Education
Emotional Legal Arguments And A Broken Leg, Rubens Damasceno-Morais
Emotional Legal Arguments And A Broken Leg, Rubens Damasceno-Morais
OSSA Conference Archive
We intend to examine ways that emotions may be intertwined within argumentative legal discourses. From the transcript of a brief trial in a Court of Appeal in Brazil we have the opportunity to observe how the emotional and rational reasoning live together in a deliberation among magistrates. “The leg broken case” allow us to examine how judges define the value of compensation to be paid in cases of moral damage. We show that not only technical arguments are the compounds of one decision; subjectivity is also important in that legal context. We would yet confirm what jurists and …
Commentary On Daniel Cohen And Katharina Stevens' "Virtuous Vices: On Objectivity And Bias In Argumentation", Tone Kvernbekk
Commentary On Daniel Cohen And Katharina Stevens' "Virtuous Vices: On Objectivity And Bias In Argumentation", Tone Kvernbekk
OSSA Conference Archive
No abstract provided.
Exploring Argumentation, Objectivity, And Bias: The Case Of Mathematical Infinity, Ami Mamolo
Exploring Argumentation, Objectivity, And Bias: The Case Of Mathematical Infinity, Ami Mamolo
OSSA Conference Archive
This paper presents an overview of several years of my research into individuals’ reasoning, argumentation, and bias when addressing problems, scenarios, and symbols related to mathematical infinity. There is a long history of debate around what constitutes “objective truth” in the realm of mathematical infinity, dating back to ancient Greece (e.g., Dubinsky et al., 2005). Modes of argumentation, hindrances, and intuitions have been largely consistent over the years and across levels of expertise (e.g., Brown et al., 2010; Fischbein et al., 1979, Tsamir, 1999). This presentation examines the interrelated complexities of notions of objectivity, bias, and argumentation as manifested in …
Comparing Two Models Of Evidence, Tone Kvernbekk
Comparing Two Models Of Evidence, Tone Kvernbekk
OSSA Conference Archive
The context for this paper is evidence-based practice (EBP). EBP is about production of desirable change. The evidence should come from randomized controlled trials (RCTs). To make sense of RCT evidence it must be placed in an argument structure. I compare two different models, Toulmin and Cartwright, and investigate whether the two models can be merged into one. I shall argue that such merging is not feasible.
Don’T Worry, Be Gappy! On The Unproblematic Gappiness Of Alleged Fallacies, Fabio Paglieri
Don’T Worry, Be Gappy! On The Unproblematic Gappiness Of Alleged Fallacies, Fabio Paglieri
OSSA Conference Archive
The history of fallacy theory is long, distinguished and, admittedly, checkered. I offer a bird eye view on it, with the aim of contrasting the standard conception of fallacies as attractive and universal errors that are hard to eradicate (section 1) with the contemporary preoccupation with “non-fallacious fallacies”, that is, arguments that fit the bill of one of the traditional fallacies but are actually respectable enough to be used in appropriate contexts (section 2). Godden and Zenker have recently argued that reinterpreting alleged fallacies as non-fallacious arguments requires supplementing the textual material with something else, e.g. probability distributions, pragmatic considerations, …