-
104Are Circular Arguments Necessarily Vicious?American Philosophical Quarterly 22 (4): 263-274. 1985.
-
1372The Argumentative Uses of Emotive LanguageRevista Iberoamericana de Argumentación 1 1-37. 2010.This paper analyzes selected examples of uses of argumentation tactics that exploit emotive language, many of them criticized as deceptive and even fallacious by classical and recent sources, including current informal logic textbooks. The analysis is based on six argumentation schemes, and an account of the dialectical setting in which these schemes are used. The three conclusions are (1) that such uses of emotive language are often reasonable and necessary in argumentation based on values, (2)…Read more
-
234Alternatives to suspicion and trust as conditions for challenge in argumentative dialoguesIn P. Riley (ed.), Engaging argument: Selected papers from the 2005 NCA/AFA Summer Conference on Argumentation, National Communication Association. pp. 438-444. 2006.A problem for dialogue models of argumentation is to specify a set of conditions under which an opponent’s claims, offered in support of a standpoint under dispute, ought to be challenged. This project is related to the issue of providing a set of acceptability conditions for claims made in a dialogue. In this paper, we consider the conditions of suspicion and trust articulated by Jacobs (Alta, 2003), arguing that neither are acceptable as general conditions for challenge. We propose a third con…Read more
-
543What we hide in words: Value-based reasoning and emotive languageJournal of Pragmatics 42 1997-2013. 2010.There are emotively powerful words that can modify our judgment, arouse our emotions and influence our decisions. This paper shows how the use of emotive meaning in argumentation can be explained by showing how their logical dimension, which can be analysed using argumentation schemes, combines with heuristic processes triggered by emotions. Arguing with emotive words is shown to use value-based practical reasoning grounded on hierarchies of values and maxims of experience for evaluative classif…Read more
-
22Knowledge plays an important role in argumentation. Yet, recent work shows that standard conceptions of knowledge in epistemology may not be entirely suitable for argumentation. This paper explores the role of knowledge in argumentation, and proposes a notion of knowledge that promises to be more suitable for argumentation by taking account of: its dynamic nature, the defeasibility of our commitments, and the non-monotonicity of many of the inferences we use in everyday reasoning and argumentati…Read more
-
24The Nature and Status of Critical Questions in Argumentation Schemes.
-
26This 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 sta…Read more
-
Action Theory, Proceeding of the Winnipeg Conference on Human ActionRevue de Métaphysique et de Morale 85 (3): 430-430. 1980.
-
6Argument: Critical Thinking, Logic and the Fallacies (M. Hogan)Philosophical Books 43 (1): 43-45. 2002.
-
50Redefining knowledge in a way suitable for argumentation theoryIn Ralph H. Johnson and David M. Godden J. Anthony Blair Christopher W. Tindale Hans V. Hansen (ed.), Dissensus and the Search for Common Ground, Ossa. pp. 1--13. 2007.Knowledge plays an important role in argumentation. Yet, recent work shows that standard conceptions of knowledge in epistemology may not be entirely suitable for argumentation. This paper explores the role of knowledge in argumentation, and proposes a notion of knowledge that promises to be more suitable for argumentation by taking account of: its dynamic nature, the defeasibility of our commitments, and the non-monotonicity of many of the inferences we use in everyday reasoning and argumentati…Read more
-
Argument schemes in dialogueIn Ralph H. Johnson and David M. Godden J. Anthony Blair Christopher W. Tindale Hans V. Hansen (ed.), Dissensus and the Search for Common Ground, Ossa. 2007.
-
58Handbook of Legal Reasoning and Argumentation (edited book)Springer Verlag. 2011.This handbook offers a deep analysis of the main forms of legal reasoning and argumentation from both a logical-philosophical and legal perspective. These forms are covered in an exhaustive and critical fashion, and the handbook accordingly divides in three parts: the first one introduces and discusses the basic concepts of practical reasoning. The second one discusses the main general forms of reasoning and argumentation relevant for legal discourse. The third one looks at their application in …Read more
-
45The Petitio: Aristotle'S Five WaysCanadian Journal of Philosophy 12 (March): 77-100. 1982.If one looks to the current textbook lore for reliable taxonomic and analytical information about the petitio principii, one is met with conceptual disarray and much too much nonsense. The present writers have recently attempted to furnish the beginnings of a theoretical reconstruction of this fallacy which is at once faithful to its formidable complexity yet useful as guide for its detection and avoidance. The fact is that the petitio has had a lengthy and interesting history, and in this paper…Read more
-
31Puzzle for Analysis: Find the FallacyInformal Logic 1 (2). 1978.Puzzle for Analysis: Find the Fallacy
-
25Circular demonstration and von Wright-Geach entailmentNotre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 20 (4): 768-772. 1979.
-
17Handbook of Legal Reasoning and Argumentation (edited book)Springer. 2011.This handbook offers a deep analysis of the main forms of legal reasoning and argumentation from both a logical-philosophical and legal perspective. These forms are covered in an exhaustive and critical fashion, and the handbook accordingly divides in three parts: the first one introduces and discusses the basic concepts of practical reasoning. The second one discusses the main general forms of reasoning and argumentation relevant for legal discourse. The third one looks at their application in …Read more
-
171A history of AI and Law in 50 papers: 25 years of the international conference on AI and Law (review)Artificial Intelligence and Law 20 (3): 215-319. 2012.We provide a retrospective of 25 years of the International Conference on AI and Law, which was first held in 1987. Fifty papers have been selected from the thirteen conferences and each of them is described in a short subsection individually written by one of the 24 authors. These subsections attempt to place the paper discussed in the context of the development of AI and Law, while often offering some personal reactions and reflections. As a whole, the subsections build into a history of the l…Read more
-
145Analogical Reasoning and Semantic Rules of InferenceRevue Internationale de Philosophie 270 (4): 419-432. 2014.
Areas of Specialization
Logic and Philosophy of Logic |
Philosophy of Computing and Information |
Areas of Interest
Philosophy of Action |
Philosophy of Law |
Philosophy of Computing and Information |