By James B. Freeman
This monograph provides a style of diagramming argument macrostructure, synthesizing the traditional circle and arrow procedure with the Toulmin version. A theoretical justification of this technique via a dialectical realizing of argument, a serious exam of Toulmin on warrants, and a radical dialogue of the linked-convergent contrast follows. dialogue comprises attention of different understandings of argument constitution and its illustration offered in Wigmore’s chart strategy, Pollock’s inference graphs, and the pragma-dialectical method of argumentation. An account of the right kind reconstruction of enthymemes and matters on the border of structural research as opposed to assessment of arguments finish the book.
Read Online or Download Argument Structure:: Representation and Theory PDF
Similar logic & language books
An advent to logical considering and the methods of argument, with 37 demonstrations of illogical and crooked considering, and the way they're triumph over via immediately suggestion.
It is a copy of a e-book released ahead of 1923. This ebook could have occasional imperfections akin to lacking or blurred pages, terrible photos, errant marks, and so forth. that have been both a part of the unique artifact, or have been brought by way of the scanning strategy. We think this paintings is culturally very important, and regardless of the imperfections, have elected to carry it again into print as a part of our carrying on with dedication to the upkeep of revealed works world wide.
- Logic, language, and meaning vol.2: Intensional logic and logical grammar
- Alexander of Aphrodisias: On the Soul: Part I: Soul as Form of the Body, Parts of the Soul, Nourishment, and Perception
- Wittgenstein’s Philosophy of Mathematics
- Juristische Logik
- Introducción a la lógica
- Logic, Language, and Meaning: Introduction to Logic, Vol. 1
Extra info for Argument Structure:: Representation and Theory
In (2008), in line with his distinction between rebutting and undercutting defeaters, defeat arrows may point either to nodes or to inference links. Defeat may go both ways. If P yields Q defeasibly while R yields ~Q, (cf. ) Fig. 35 represents not only the inferences but the mutual defeat relations between Q and ~Q. Fig. 35 P R Q ~Q In (1995), Pollock represents defeat links as holding between nodes exclusively. By contrast, in (2008) he represents only rebutting defeat relations as holding between nodes, while undercutting defeat relations hold between a node and an inference arrow.
The question of their basic premise acceptability does not arise (barring challenges to the testimony). Secondly, if one has taken a piece of testimony into account in reasoning toward a decision, one sees its relevance for supporting some claim in that reasoning process. The issue of relevance thus also does not arise. But, as we shall develop in Chapter 6 (See pp. 170–171), a primary motivation for making the linked-convergent distinction concerns identifying and subsequently removing from further consideration unacceptable or irrelevant reasons.
11 D So, Since W Q C Unless R On account of B This is all straightforward. We appeal to data D to justify claim C. The arrow indicates this evidential support. The warrant W licenses the move from D to C and so is “attached to” the arrow. The backing B authenticates the warrant and so is attached to it. The modal qualifier Q is understood to modify the claim, indicating the force with which it is asserted, and so is written next to the claim. Rebuttals R indicate conditions when the warrant would have to be set aside and so the force of the claim invalidated.
Argument Structure:: Representation and Theory by James B. Freeman