Switch to: References

Citations of:

The assessment of argumentation based on abduction

Jean H. M. Wagemans

Add citations

You must login to add citations.

Recognizing Argument Types and Adding Missing Reasons.Christoph Lumer - 2019 - In Bart J. Garssen, David Godden, Gordon Mitchell & Jean Wagemans (eds.), Proceedings of the Ninth Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation (ISSA). [Amsterdam, July 3-6, 2018.]. Sic Sat. pp. 769-777.details The article develops and justifies, on the basis of the epistemological argumentation theory, two central pieces of the theory of evaluative argumentation interpretation: 1. criteria for recognizing argument types and 2. rules for adding reasons to create ideal arguments. Ad 1: The criteria for identifying argument types are a selection of essential elements from the definitions of the respective argument types. Ad 2: After presenting the general principles for adding reasons (benevolence, authenticity, immanence, optimization), heuristics are proposed for finding missing (...) Download Export citation Bookmark 3 citations
Peirce Knew Why Abduction Isn’t IBE—A Scheme and Critical Questions for Abductive Argument.Shiyang Yu & Frank Zenker - 2017 - Argumentation 32 (4):569-587.details Whether abduction is treated as an argument or as an inference, the mainstream view presupposes a tight connection between abduction and inference to the best explanation. This paper critically evaluates this link and supports a narrower view on abduction. Our main thesis is that merely the hypothesis-generative aspect, but not the evaluative aspect, is properly abductive in the sense introduced by C. S. Peirce. We show why equating abduction with IBE unnecessarily complicates argument evaluation by levelling the status of abduction (...) Download Export citation Bookmark 14 citations
Argumentative Patterns for Justifying Scientific Explanations.Jean H. M. Wagemans - 2016 - Argumentation 30 (1):97-108.details The practice of justifying scientific explanations generates argumentative patterns in which several types of arguments may play a role. This paper is aimed at identifying these patterns on the basis of an exploration of the institutional conventions regarding the nature, the shape and the quality of scientific explanations as reflected in the writings of influential philosophers of science. First, a basic pattern for justifying scientific explanations is described. Then, two types of extensions of this pattern are presented. These extensions are (...) Download Export citation Bookmark 11 citations
On Abduction and Interpretation.Antonio Duarte - 2019 - Crítica. Revista Hispanoamericana de Filosofía 51 (151):65-84.details Here, I focus on deviations of intent, from that expressed by the standard or ordinary use of language, in instances where abductive reasoning plays a necessary role. In such cases, speakers usually utter some “mysterious” words based on the assumed abductive capability of their interlocutors. In order to cause the desired effect in the audience, the speaker relies on the hearer’s knowledge of the relevant common dialogue framework and thus uses the utterance as an abductive trigger. For purposes of explanation, (...) Download Export citation Bookmark 1 citation
The strategic formulation of abductive arguments in everyday reasoning.Jansen Henrike - unknowndetails Since everyday abductive arguments convey the arguer’s individual interpretation of reality, they often exhibit a weak relationship between the premise and the conclusion. After all, what seems obvious to the arguer may appear far-fetched to an opponent. This paper examines some presentational devices that contribute to an arguer’s rhetorical goal of presenting the argument in such a way that the conclusion is suggested to be the result of a thorough investigative procedure. Download Export citation Bookmark

1