Switch to: References

Citations of:

Rational argumentation under uncertainty

In G. Kreuzbauer, N. Gratzl & E. Hiebl (eds.), Persuasion Und Wissenschaft: Aktuelle Fragestellungen von Rhetorik Und Argumentationstheorie. Lit. pp. 181--191 (2007)

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. On argument strength.Niki Pfeifer - 2013 - In Frank Zenker (ed.), Bayesian argumentation. The practical side of probability. Dordrecht, Netherlands: pp. 185-193.
    Everyday life reasoning and argumentation is defeasible and uncertain. I present a probability logic framework to rationally reconstruct everyday life reasoning and argumentation. Coherence in the sense of de Finetti is used as the basic rationality norm. I discuss two basic classes of approaches to construct measures of argument strength. The first class imposes a probabilistic relation between the premises and the conclusion. The second class imposes a deductive relation. I argue for the second class, as the first class is (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  • Modeling the Ellsberg paradox by argument strength.Niki Pfeifer & H. Pankka - 2017 - In G. Gunzelmann, A. Howes, T. Tenbrink & E. Davelaar (eds.), Proceedings of the 39th Cognitive Science Society Meeting. pp. 925-930.
    We present a formal measure of argument strength, which combines the ideas that conclusions of strong arguments are (i) highly probable and (ii) their uncertainty is relatively precise. Likewise, arguments are weak when their conclusion probability is low or when it is highly imprecise. We show how the proposed measure provides a new model of the Ellsberg paradox. Moreover, we further substantiate the psychological plausibility of our approach by an experiment (N = 60). The data show that the proposed measure (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark