In the late 1990s, AI witnessed an increasing use of the term 'argumentation' within its bounds: in natural language processing, in user interface design, in logic programming and nonmonotonic reasoning, in Al's interface with the legal community, and in the newly emerging field of multi-agent systems. It seemed to me that many of these uses of argumentation were inspired by (of- ten inspired) guesswork, and that a great majority of the AI community were unaware that there was a maturing, rich field of research in Argumentation Theory (and Critical Thinking and Informal Logic) that had been...

This book provides a new, linguistic approach to Argumentation Theory. Its main goal is to integrate the logical, dialectical and rhetorical dimensions of argumentation in a model providing a unitary treatment of its justificatory and persuasive powers. This model takes as its basis Speech Acts Theory in order to characterize argumentation as a second-order speech act complex. The result is a systematic and comprehensive theory of the interpretation, analysis and evaluation of arguments. This theory sheds light on the many faces of argumentative communication: verbal and non-verbal,...

This monograph opens by presenting a method of diagramming argument macrostructure, synthesizing the standard circle and arrow approach with the Toulmin model. A theoretical justification follows, including an account of the proper reconstructon of enthymemes.

This book presents a constitutive approach to controversy based on a discourse analysis of news texts, focusing on the role of journalists as participants who shape public controversy for readers. Drawing data from the Reuters Corpus, the project identifies formulas that journalists use in reporting controversy and draws conclusions about how these serve professional and textual functions and how they shape public controversy as a natural, historical, and pragmatic event. While the traditions of dialectic and rhetoric have focused on the prescriptive aim of training participants to resolve...

Summarizing, in The Uses of Argument Toulmin emphasized a number of points that are by now familiar, but still deserve attention: 1. Reasoning and argument involve not only support for points of view, but also attack against them. 2. Reasoning can have qualified conclusions. 3. There are other good types of argument than those of standard formal logic. 4. Unstated assumptions linking premisses to a conclusion are better thought of as inference licenses than as implicit premisses. 5. Standards of reasoning can be field dependent, and can be themselves the subject of argumentation. Each of...

Argumentative Indicators: A Pragma-Dialectical Study identifies and analyses English words and expressions that are crucial for an adequate reconstruction of argumentative discourse. It provides the analyst of argumentative discussions and texts with a systematic set of instruments for giving a well founded analysis which results in an analytic overview of the elements that are relevant for the evaluation of the argumentation. In the book a systematic connection is made between linguistic insights into the characteristics of argumentative discourse and insights from argumentation theory into...

Provides a linguistic approach to Argumentation Theory. This title integrates the logical, dialectical and rhetorical dimensions of argumentation in a model providing a unitary treatment of its justificatory and persuasive powers.

This book explores the foundations of argumentation theory and related disciplines, illuminating the central debates and core ideas in four areas: Critical Thinking, Informal Logic, Argument Theory and Logic, Dialectic and Rhetoric.

In Fallacies and Judgments of Reasonableness, Frans H. van Eemeren, Bart Garssen and Bert Meuffels report on their systematic empirical research of the conventional validity of the pragma-dialectical discussion rules. The experimental studies they carried out during more than ten years start from the pragma-dialectical theory of argumentation developed at the University of Amsterdam, their home university. In these studies they test methodically the intersubjective acceptability of the rules for critical discussion proposed in this theory by confronting ordinary arguers who have not received...