| Abstract |
This paper shows how the critical questions matching an argumentation scheme can be mod-eled in the Carneades argumentation system as three kinds of premises. Ordinary premises hold only if they are supported by sufficient arguments. Assumptions hold, by default, until they have been questioned. With exceptions the negation holds, by default, until the exception has been supported by sufficient arguments. By “sufficient arguments”, we mean arguments sufficient to satisfy the applicable proof standard.
|
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) |
| Categories | (categorize this paper) |
| Options |
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Request removal from index
|
Download options
PhilArchive copy
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy Papers currently archived: 70,192
External links
- scholar.uwindsor.ca
(no proxy) - scholar.uwindsor.ca [2] (no proxy)
- scholar.uwindsor.ca [3] (no proxy)
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library
- Only published works are available at libraries.
References found in this work BETA
Argumentation Schemes.Douglas Walton, Chris Reed & Fabrizio Macagno - 2008 - Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.
The New Rhetoric: A Treatise on Argumentation.Chaïm Perelman & Lucie Olbrechts-Tyteca - 1969 - Notre Dame, IN, USA: Notre Dame University Press.
Argumentation Schemes.Douglas Walton, Christopher Reed & Fabrizio Macagno - 2008 - Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.
View all 18 references / Add more references
Citations of this work BETA
Throwing the Baby Out with the Water: From Reasonably Scrutinizing Authorities to Rampant Scepticism About Expertise.Markus Seidel - 2014 - Informal Logic 34 (2):192-218.
On a Razor's Edge: Evaluating Arguments From Expert Opinion.Douglas Walton - 2014 - Argument and Computation 5 (2-3):139-159.
Designing Critical Questions for Argumentation Schemes.Michael D. Baumtrog - 2021 - Argumentation 35 (4):629-643.
Similar books and articles
The Carneades Model of Argument and Burden of Proof.Thomas F. Gordon, Henry Prakken & Douglas Walton - 2007 - Artificial Intelligence 171 (10-15):875-896.
Intertemporal Disagreement and Empirical Slippery Slope Arguments.Thomas Douglas - 2010 - Utilitas 22 (2):184-197.
Explanation, Entailment, and Leibnizian Cosmological Arguments.Christopher G. Weaver - 2009 - Metaphysica 10 (1):97-108.
Faith and the Existence of God: R. G. Swinburne.R. G. Swinburne - 1988 - Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement 24:121-143.
Is There a Metaphysical Proof of God's Existence?Piotr Moskal - 2008 - Forum Philosophicum: International Journal for Philosophy 13 (2):167-175.
Reconstructing Complex Analogy Argumentation in Judicial Decisions: A Pragma-Dialectical Perspective.Harm Kloosterhuis - 2005 - Argumentation 19 (4):471-483.
On a Razor's Edge: Evaluating Arguments From Expert Opinion.Douglas Walton - 2014 - Argument and Computation 5 (2-3):139-159.
The Possibility of Inductive Moral Arguments.Mark T. Nelson - 2006 - Philosophical Papers 35 (2):231-246.
Is Formal Logic a Science About Rational Arguments?Svatopluk Nevrkla - 2011 - Organon F: Medzinárodný Časopis Pre Analytickú Filozofiu 18 (4):499-511.
Epistemic Contrastivism, Knowledge and Practical Reasoning.Peter Baumann - 2016 - Erkenntnis 81 (1):59-68.
Analytics
Added to PP index
2015-04-02
Total views
14 ( #732,190 of 2,507,401 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #416,983 of 2,507,401 )
2015-04-02
Total views
14 ( #732,190 of 2,507,401 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #416,983 of 2,507,401 )
How can I increase my downloads?
Downloads
