Switch to: Citations

Add references

You must login to add references.
  1. `hidden' Or `missing' Premises.James Gough & Christopher W. Tindale - 1985 - Informal Logic 7 (2).
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   24 citations  
  • (1 other version)Enthymematic Arguments.David Hitchcock - 1985 - Informal Logic 7 (2).
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   68 citations  
  • The Epistemological Basis of Aristotelian Dialectic.Robert Bolton - 1990 - In Daniel Devereux & Pierre Pellegrin (eds.), Biologie, Logique et Metaphysique Chez Aristote: Actes du Seminaire Cr.S.-N.S.F., 28 Juin-3 Juillet 1987. Paris: Editions du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique. pp. 185-236.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   43 citations  
  • Argumentation schemes for presumptive reasoning.Douglas N. Walton - 1996 - Mahwah, N.J.: L. Erlbaum Associates.
    This book identifies 25 argumentation schemes for presumptive reasoning and matches a set of critical questions to each.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   242 citations  
  • Identifying implicit assumptions.Robert H. Ennis - 1982 - Synthese 51 (1):61 - 86.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   60 citations  
  • Approximate common knowledge and co-ordination: Recent lessons from game theory. [REVIEW]Stephen Morris & Hyun Shin - 1997 - Journal of Logic, Language and Information 6 (2):171-90.
    The importance of the notion of common knowledge in sustaining cooperative outcomes in strategic situations is well appreciated. However, the systematic analysis of the extent to which small departures from common knowledge affect equilibrium in games has only recently been attempted.We review the main themes in this literature, in particular, the notion of common p-belief. We outline both the analytical issues raised, and the potential applicability of such ideas to game theory, computer science and the philosophy of language.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • A map of common knowledge logics.Mamoru Kaneko, Takashi Nagashima, Nobu-Yuki Suzuki & Yoshihito Tanaka - 2002 - Studia Logica 71 (1):57-86.
    In order to capture the concept of common knowledge, various extensions of multi-modal epistemic logics, such as fixed-point ones and infinitary ones, have been proposed. Although we have now a good list of such proposed extensions, the relationships among them are still unclear. The purpose of this paper is to draw a map showing the relationships among them. In the propositional case, these extensions turn out to be all Kripke complete and can be comparable in a meaningful manner. F. Wolter (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Aristotle and the methods of ethics.Jonathan Barnes - 1980 - Revue Internationale de Philosophie 34 (3):490.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   67 citations  
  • Relating protocols for dynamic dispute with logics for defeasible argumentation.Henry Prakken - 2001 - Synthese 127 (1-2):187-219.
    This article investigates to what extent protocols for dynamicdisputes, i.e., disputes in which the information base can vary at differentstages, can be justified in terms of logics for defeasible argumentation. Firsta general framework is formulated for dialectical proof theories for suchlogics. Then this framework is adapted to serve as a framework for protocols fordynamic disputes, after which soundness and fairness properties are formulated for such protocols relative to dialectical proof theories. It then turns out that certaintypes of protocols that are (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  • (2 other versions)An introduction to logic.H. W. B. Joseph - 1906 - Oxford,: Clarendon press.
    "First published by Oxford University Press, 1916."--Title page verso.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   37 citations  
  • Enthymemes, common knowledge, and plausible inference.Douglas N. Walton - 2001 - Philosophy and Rhetoric 34 (2):93-112.
    In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Philosophy and Rhetoric 34.2 (2001) 93-112 [Access article in PDF] Enthymemes, Common Knowledge, and Plausible Inference Douglas Walton The study of enthymemes has always been regarded as important in logic, critical thinking, and rhetoric, but too often it is the formal or mechanistic aspect of it that has been in the forefront. This investigation will show that there is a kind of plausibilistic script-based reasoning, of a kind that (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   24 citations  
  • (1 other version)Towards a formal account of reasoning about evidence: Argumentation schemes and generalisations. [REVIEW]Floris Bex, Henry Prakken, Chris Reed & Douglas Walton - 2003 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 11 (2-3):125-165.
    This paper studies the modelling of legal reasoning about evidence within general theories of defeasible reasoning and argumentation. In particular, Wigmore's method for charting evidence and its use by modern legal evidence scholars is studied in order to give a formal underpinning in terms of logics for defeasible argumentation. Two notions turn out to be crucial, viz. argumentation schemes and empirical generalisations.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   63 citations  
  • Modelling Defeasibility in Law: Logic or Procedure?Henry Prakken - 2001 - Fundamenta Informaticae 48 (2-3):253-271.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   13 citations  
  • Mathematical models of dialogue.C. L. Hamblin - 1971 - Theoria 37 (2):130-155.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   114 citations  
  • Common knowledge revisited.Ronald Fagin, Joseph Y. Halpern, Yoram Moses & Moshe Y. Vardi - 1999 - Annals of Pure and Applied Logic 96 (1-3):89-105.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   12 citations  
  • Arguments as Belief Structures: Towards a Toulmin Layout of Doxastic Dynamics?Fabio Paglieri & Cristiano Castelfranchi - unknown
    Argumentation is a dialogical attempt to bring about a desired change in the beliefs of another agent – that is, to trigger a specific belief revision process in the mind of such agent. However, so far formal models of belief revision widely neglected any systematic comparison with argumentation theories, to the point that even the simplest argumentation structures cannot be captured within such models. In this essay, we endeavour to bring together argumentation and belief revision in the same formal framework, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations