Switch to: References

Citations of:

Burdens of Proof in Modern Discourse

Yale University Press (1992)

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. The Rules of Logic Composition for the Bayesian Epistemic e-Values.Wagner Borges & Julio Michael Stern - 2007 - Logic Journal of the IGPL 15 (5-6):401-420.
    In this paper, the relationship between the e-value of a complex hypothesis, H, and those of its constituent elementary hypotheses, Hj, j = 1… k, is analyzed, in the independent setup. The e-value of a hypothesis H, ev, is a Bayesian epistemic, credibility or truth value defined under the Full Bayesian Significance Testing mathematical apparatus. The questions addressed concern the important issue of how the truth value of H, and the truth function of the corresponding FBST structure M, relate to (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   20 citations  
  • Gaskins`sBurdens of Proof in Modern Discourse.Eugene Garver - 1994 - Informal Logic 16 (3).
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • The Burden of Proof and Its Role in Argumentation.Ulrike Hahn & Mike Oaksford - 2007 - Argumentation 21 (1):39-61.
    The notion of “the burden of proof” plays an important role in real-world argumentation contexts, in particular in law. It has also been given a central role in normative accounts of argumentation, and has been used to explain a range of classic argumentation fallacies. We argue that in law the goal is to make practical decisions whereas in critical discussion the goal is frequently simply to increase or decrease degree of belief in a proposition. In the latter case, it is (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   29 citations  
  • FBST Regularization and Model Selection.Julio Michael Stern & Carlos Alberto de Braganca Pereira - 2001 - In Julio Michael Stern & Carlos Alberto de Braganca Pereira (eds.), Annals of the 7th International Conference on Information Systems Analysis and Synthesis. Orlando FL: pp. 7: 60-65..
    We show how the Full Bayesian Significance Test (FBST) can be used as a model selection criterion. The FBST was presented by Pereira and Stern as a coherent Bayesian significance test. Key Words: Bayesian test; Evidence; Global optimization; Information; Model selection; Numerical integration; Posterior density; Precise hypothesis; Regularization. AMS: 62A15; 62F15; 62H15.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Significance Tests, Belief Calculi, and Burden of Proof in Legal and Scientific Discourse.Julio Michael Stern - 2003 - Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications 101:139-147.
    We review the definition of the Full Bayesian Significance Test (FBST), and summarize its main statistical and epistemological characteristics. We review also the Abstract Belief Calculus (ABC) of Darwiche and Ginsberg, and use it to analyze the FBST’s value of evidence. This analysis helps us understand the FBST properties and interpretation. The definition of value of evidence against a sharp hypothesis, in the FBST setup, was motivated by applications of Bayesian statistical reasoning to legal matters where the sharp hypotheses were (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  • Cognitive Constructivism, Eigen-Solutions, and Sharp Statistical Hypotheses.Julio Michael Stern - 2007 - Cybernetics and Human Knowing 14 (1):9-36.
    In this paper epistemological, ontological and sociological questions concerning the statistical significance of sharp hypotheses in scientific research are investigated within the framework provided by Cognitive Constructivism and the FBST (Full Bayesian Significance Test). The constructivist framework is contrasted with the traditional epistemological settings for orthodox Bayesian and frequentist statistics provided by Decision Theory and Falsificationism.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   16 citations  
  • Argument Has No Function.Jean Goodwin - 2007 - Informal Logic 27 (1):69-90.
    Douglas Walton has been right in calling us to attend to the pragmatics of argument. He has, however, also insisted that arguments should be understood and assessed by considering the functions they perform; and from this, I dissent. Argument has no determinable function in the sense Walton needs, and even if it did, that function would not ground norms for argumentative practice. As an alternative to a functional theory of argumentative pragmatics, I propose a design view, which draws attention to (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   51 citations  
  • The public face of presumptions.Karen Petroski - 2008 - Episteme 5 (3):pp. 388-401.
    We commonly think of presumptions as second-best inferential tools allowing us to reach conclusions, if we must, under conditions of limited information. Scholarship on the topic across the disciplines has espoused a common conception of presumptions that defines them according to their function within the decisionmaking process. This focus on the “private” face of presumptions has generated a predominantly critical and grudging view of them, perpetuated certain conceptual ambiguities, and, most important, neglected the fact that what we refer to as (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • Bayesian Evidence Test for Precise Hypotheses.Julio Michael Stern - 2003 - Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference 117 (2):185-198.
    The full Bayesian signi/cance test (FBST) for precise hypotheses is presented, with some illustrative applications. In the FBST we compute the evidence against the precise hypothesis. We discuss some of the theoretical properties of the FBST, and provide an invariant formulation for coordinate transformations, provided a reference density has been established. This evidence is the probability of the highest relative surprise set, “tangential” to the sub-manifold (of the parameter space) that defines the null hypothesis.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   14 citations  
  • Argumentation in large, complex practices.Aakhus Mark, Ziek Paul & Dadlani Punit - unknown
    Differences arise in macro-activities, such as the production of energy, food, and healthcare, where the management of these differences happens in polylogues as many actors pursue scores of positions on a variety of issues in numerous venues. Polylogues are essential to the large-scale practices that organize macro-activities but present significant challenges for argumentation theory and research. Key to the challenge is conceptualizing the variety of argumentative roles that go beyond the classic normative definition of protagonist and antagonist. A macroscope is (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • The influence of medical professionalism on scientific practice.Michael D. Kirk-Smith & David D. Stretch - 2003 - Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice 9 (4):417-422.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • The Public Sphere and the Norms of Transactional Argument.Jean Goodwin - 2005 - Informal Logic 25 (2):151-165.
    An outsider to argument theory, should she look through the rich outpouring of our recent work, might be amused to find us theorists not following our own prescriptions. We propound our ideas, but we don't always interact with each other--we don't argue. The essays by William Rehg and Robert Asen make promising start on rectifying this difficulty. I want to discuss them, first, to show how they acknowledge in exemplary fashion a pair of challenges I think we should all be (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • Presumptions In Roman Legal Argumentation.Hanns Hohmann - unknown
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Presumption in legal argumentation: from antiquity to the middle ages.Hanns Hohmann - unknown
    This paper traces the evolution of the concept of presumption from a subordinate part of the Roman law to a central feature of legal disputations in medieval law. Special attention will be given to the second edition of the Libellus Pylei Disputato rius by Pilius of Medicina, and to the anonymous Tractatus de Praesumptionibus. My analysis will emphasize elements of these developments useful in the renewed discussion about the role of presumptions in argumentation stimulate d particularly by Richard Gaskins' Burdens (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Presumptions and the Distribution of Argumentative Burdens in Acts of Proposing and Accusing.Fred J. Kauffeld - 1997 - Argumentation 12 (2):245-266.
    This paper joins the voices warning against hasty transference of legal concepts of presumption to other kinds of argumentation, especially to deliberation about future acts and policies. Comparison of the pragmatics which respectively constitute the illocutionary acts of accusing and proposing reveals important differences in the ways presumptions prompt accusers and proposers to undertake probative responsibilities and, also, points to corresponding differences in their probative duties. This comparison has theoretically important implication regarding the norms governing persuasive argumentation. The paper is (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   72 citations  
  • Reasonableness and Effectiveness in Argumentative Discourse: Fifty Contributions to the Development of Pragma-Dialectics.Bart Garssen, Frans Eemeren & Frans H. van Eemeren (eds.) - 2015 - Cham, Switzerland: Springer Verlag.
    How do Dutch people let each other know that they disagree? What do they say when they want to resolve their difference of opinion by way of an argumentative discussion? In what way do they convey that they are convinced by each other’s argumentation? How do they criticize each other’s argumentative moves? Which words and expressions do they use in these endeavors? By answering these questions this short essay provides a brief inventory of the language of argumentation in Dutch.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   20 citations  
  • Cost-effectiveness analysis of health care services, and concepts of distributive justice.Gert Jan van der Wilt - 1994 - Health Care Analysis 2 (4):296-305.
    Two answers to the question ‘how can we allocate health care resources fairly?’ are introduced and discussed. Both utilitarian and egalitarian approaches are found relevant, but both exhibit considerable theoretical and practical difficulties. Neither seems capable of solving the problem on its own. It is suggested that, for practical purposes, a version of Rawls' famous thought experiment might provide at least some enlightenment about which theoretical approach should be used to address the question.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Rethinking the presumption of atheism.Keith Burgess-Jackson - 2018 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 84 (1):93-111.
    Is there—or rather, ought there to be—a presumption of atheism, as Antony Flew so famously argued nearly half a century ago? It is time to revisit this issue. After clarifying the concept of a presumption of atheism, I take up the evaluative question of whether there ought to be a presumption of atheism, focusing on Flew’s arguments for an affirmative answer. I conclude that Flew’s arguments, one of which rests on an analogy with the presumption of innocence, fail.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • The Nature and the Place of Presumptions in Law and Legal Argumentation.Raymundo Gama - 2017 - Argumentation 31 (3):555-572.
    This paper explores two persistent questions in the literature on presumptions: the place and the nature of presumptions in law and legal argumentation. These questions were originally raised by James Bradley Thayer, one of the masters of the Law of Evidence and the author of the classic chapter devoted this subject in A preliminary treatise on Evidence. Like Thayer, I believe that these questions deserve attention. First the paper shows that the connection between presumptions and argumentation is a constant feature (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  • Science court: A case study in designing discourse to manage policy controversy.Mark Aakhus - 1999 - Knowledge, Technology & Policy 12 (2):20-37.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • Two views of the necessity to manifest rationality in argumentation.Fred J. Kauffeld - 2007 - In Christopher W. Tindale Hans V. Hansen (ed.), Dissensus and the Search for Common Ground. OSSA.
    This paper contrasts two views of the necessity to manifest the rational adequacy of argumentation. The view advanced by Ralph Johnson’s program for informal logic will be compared to one based on an account of obligations incurred in speech acts. Both views hold that arguers are commonly obliged to make it apparent that they are offering adequate support for their positions, but they differ in their accounts of the nature and scope of those obligations.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Commentary on van Eemeren & Houtlosser.Joseph Wenzel - unknown
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark