Automated Argument Analysis – Comment on: Mizrahi & Dickinson: "Argumentation in Philosophical Practice: An Empirical Study"

Evidence, Persuasion and Diversity. Proceedings of Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation Conference, Vol. 12 (2020) (2020)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
The paper critically discusses an empirical study by Mizrahi & Dickinson 2020, which analyzes in a huge data base (JSTORE) the incidence of three types of philosophical arguments. Their results are: 1. Deductive arguments were the most commeon type of argument in philosophy until the end of the 20th century. 2. Around 2008 a shift in methodology occurred, such that the indcutive arguments outweigh other types of argument. The paper, first, criticizes the empirical study as grossly false and considers the - very limited - possibilities of recognition of argument types by present computer programs.
Categories
(categorize this paper)
PhilPapers/Archive ID
LUMAAA-3
Upload history
Archival date: 2021-01-12
View other versions
Added to PP index
2021-01-12

Total views
6 ( #57,089 of 55,868 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
6 ( #53,125 of 55,868 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.