Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Bayesian Argumentation – The Practical Side of Probability.Frank Zenker (ed.) - 2012 - Springer.
    Relevant to, and drawing from, a range of disciplines, the chapters in this collection show the diversity, and applicability, of research in Bayesian argumentation.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  • A Plea for Ecological Argument Technologies.Fabio Paglieri - 2017 - Philosophy and Technology 30 (2):209-238.
    In spite of significant research efforts, argument technologies do not seem poised to scale up as much as most commentators would hope or even predict. In this paper, I discuss what obstacles bar the way to more widespread success of argument technologies and venture some suggestions on how to circumvent such difficulties: doing so will require a significant shift in how this research area is typically understood and practiced. I begin by exploring a much broader yet closely related question: To (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Logic, Reasoning, Argumentation: Insights From the Wild.Frank Zenker - 2018 - Logic and Logical Philosophy 27 (4):421-451.
    This article provides a brief selective overview and discussion of recent research into natural language argumentation that may inform the study of human reasoning on the assumption that an episode of argumentation issues an invitation to accept a corresponding inference. As this research shows, arguers typically seek to establish new consequences based on prior information. And they typically do so vis-à-vis a real or an imagined opponent, or an opponent-position, in ways that remain sensitive to considerations of context, audiences, and (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • Modus Ponens and Modus Tollens: Their Validity/Invalidity in Natural Language Arguments.Yong-Sok Ri - 2017 - Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric 50 (1):253-267.
    The precedent studies on the validity of Modus ponens and Modus tollens have been carried out with most regard to a major type of conditionals in which the conditional clause is a sufficient condition for the main clause. But we sometimes, in natural language arguments, find other types of conditionals in which the conditional clause is a necessary or necessary and sufficient condition for the main clause. In this paper I reappraise, on the basis of new definitions of Modus ponens (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Logical Fallacies as Codified Within the Conceptual System of the Lvov-Warsaw School.Marcin Koszowy - 2012 - Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric 30 (43).
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • A Dialogical, Multi‐Agent Account of the Normativity of Logic.Catarina Dutilh Novaes - 2015 - Dialectica 69 (4):587-609.
    The paper argues that much of the difficulty with making progress on the issue of the normativity of logic for thought, as discussed in the literature, stems from a misapprehension of what logic is normative for. The claim is that, rather than mono-agent mental processes, logic in fact comprises norms for quite specific situations of multi-agent dialogical interactions, in particular special forms of debates. This reconceptualization is inspired by historical developments in logic and mathematics, in particular the pervasiveness of such (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   24 citations  
  • Denying Antecedents and Affirming Consequents: The State of the Art.David Godden & Frank Zenker - 2015 - Informal Logic 35 (1):88-134.
    Recent work on conditional reasoning argues that denying the antecedent [DA] and affirming the consequent [AC] are defeasible but cogent patterns of argument, either because they are effective, rational, albeit heuristic applications of Bayesian probability, or because they are licensed by the principle of total evidence. Against this, we show that on any prevailing interpretation of indicative conditionals the premises of DA and AC arguments do not license their conclusions without additional assumptions. The cogency of DA and AC inferences rather (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  • Denying the Antecedent: The Fallacy That Never Was, or Sometimes Isn’T?Luis Duarte D’Almeida & Euan MacDonald - 2016 - Informal Logic 36 (1):26-63.
    : In this paper we examine two challenges to the orthodox understanding of the fallacy of denying the antecedent. One challenge is to say that passages thought to express the fallacy can usually be given an interpretation on which they express valid arguments, entitling us to query whether the fallacy is commonly, if ever, committed at all. We discuss this claim in Section 1. The second challenge comes from those who think that there are legitimate uses of denying the antecedent (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Denying the Antecedent: Its Effective Use in Argumentation.Mark A. Stone - 2012 - Informal Logic 32 (3):327-356.
    Denying the antecedent is an invalid form of reasoning that is typically identified and frowned upon as a formal fallacy. Contrary to arguments that it does not or at least should not occur, denying the antecedent is a legitimate and effective strategy for undermining a position. Since it is not a valid form of argument, it cannot prove that the position is false. But it can provide inductive evidence that this position is probably false. In this role, it is neither (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • Don’T Worry, Be Gappy! On the Unproblematic Gappiness of Alleged Fallacies.Fabio Paglieri - unknown
    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 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. Godden and Zenker have recently argued that reinterpreting alleged fallacies as (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations