Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Dialogue Types, Argumentation Schemes, and Mathematical Practice: Douglas Walton and Mathematics.Andrew Aberdein - 2021 - Journal of Applied Logics 8 (1):159-182.
    Douglas Walton’s multitudinous contributions to the study of argumentation seldom, if ever, directly engage with argumentation in mathematics. Nonetheless, several of the innovations with which he is most closely associated lend themselves to improving our understanding of mathematical arguments. I concentrate on two such innovations: dialogue types (§1) and argumentation schemes (§2). I argue that both devices are much more applicable to mathematical reasoning than may be commonly supposed.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Higher Education's Microcredentialing Craze: A Postdigital-Deweyan Critique.Shane J. Ralston - 2021 - Postdigital Science and Education 3 (1):83-101.
    As the value of a university degree plummets, the popularity of digital microcredentials has soared. Similar to recent calls for the early adoption of Blockchain technology, the so-called ‘microcredentialing craze’ could be no more than a fad, marketing hype or another case of ‘learning innovation theater’. Alternatively, the introduction of these compact skills- and competency-based online certificate programs might augur the arrival of a legitimate successor to the four-year university diploma. The thesis of this article is that the craze for (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Computational Agents as a Test-Bed to Study the Philosophical Dialogue Model "DE": A Development of Mackenzie's DC.Tangming Yuan, David Moore & Alec Grierson - 2003 - Informal Logic 23 (3):263-284.
    This paper reports research concerning a suitable dialogue model for human computer debate. In particular, we consider the adoption of Moore's (1993) utilization of Mackenzie's (1979) game DC, means of using computational agents as the test-bed to facilitate evaluation of the proposed model, and means of using the evaluation results as motivation to further develop a dialogue model, which can prevent fallacious argument and common errors. It is anticipated that this work will contribute toward the development of human computer dialogue, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Computer decision-support systems for public argumentation: assessing deliberative legitimacy. [REVIEW]William Rehg, Peter McBurney & Simon Parsons - 2005 - AI and Society 19 (3):203-228.
    Recent proposals for computer-assisted argumentation have drawn on dialectical models of argumentation. When used to assist public policy planning, such systems also raise questions of political legitimacy. Drawing on deliberative democratic theory, we elaborate normative criteria for deliberative legitimacy and illustrate their use for assessing two argumentation systems. Full assessment of such systems requires experiments in which system designers draw on expertise from the social sciences and enter into the policy deliberation itself at the level of participants.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • Commentary on Reed & Walton.Leo Groarke - unknown
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Applications of Argumentation Schemes.Chris Reed & Doug Walton - unknown
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   14 citations  
  • Individual Differences in the Interpretation of Commitment in Argumentation.Robert B. Ricco & Anthony Nelson Sierra - 2011 - Argumentation 25 (1):37-61.
    The present study explored several dispositional factors associated with individual differences in lay adult’s interpretation of when an arguer is, or is not, committed to a statement. College students were presented with several two-person arguments in which the proponent of a thesis conceded a key point in the last turn. Participants were then asked to indicate the extent to which that concession implied a change in the proponent’s attitude toward any of the previous statements in the argument. Participants designated as (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Medieval Disputationes de obligationibus as Formal Dialogue Systems.Sara L. Uckelman - 2013 - Argumentation 27 (2):143-166.
    Formal dialogue systems model rule-based interaction between agents and as such have multiple applications in multi-agent systems and AI more generally. Their conceptual roots are in formal theories of natural argumentation, of which Hamblin’s formal systems of argumentation in Hamblin (Fallacies. Methuen, London, 1970, Theoria 37:130–135, 1971) are some of the earliest examples. Hamblin cites the medieval theory of obligationes as inspiration for his development of formal argumentation. In an obligatio, two agents, the Opponent and the Respondent, engage in an (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Figures of dialogue: a view from Ludics.Alain Lecomte & Myriam Quatrini - 2011 - Synthese 183 (S1):59-85.
    In this paper, we study dialogue as a game, but not only in the sense in which there would exist winning strategies and a priori rules. Dialogue is not governed by game rules like for chess or other games, since even if we start from a priori rules, it is always possible to play with them, provided that some invariant properties are preserved. An important discovery of Ludics is that such properties may be expressed in geometrical terms. The main feature (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations