•  7
    All We Need Is Trust: How the COVID-19 Outbreak Reconfigured Trust in Italian Public Institutions
    with Rino Falcone, Elisa Colì, Silvia Felletti, Alessandro Sapienza, and Cristiano Castelfranchi
    Frontiers in Psychology 11. 2020.
  •  4
    Response to my commentator
    Proceedings of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation Conference 10. 2013.
  •  16
    Introduction: Theoretical and Technological Perspectives on Online Arguments
    with Chris Reed and Fabio Paglieri
    Philosophy and Technology 30 (2): 131-135. 2017.
  • The psychology of argument: Cognitive approaches to argumentation and persuasion (edited book)
    with Laura Bonelli and Silvia Felletti
    College Publications. 2016.
  •  24
    A Plea for Ecological Argument Technologies
    Philosophy and Technology 30 (2): 209-238. 2017.
    In spite of significant research efforts, argument technologies do not seem poised to scale up as much as most commentators would hope or even predict. In this paper, I discuss what obstacles bar the way to more widespread success of argument technologies and venture some suggestions on how to circumvent such difficulties: doing so will require a significant shift in how this research area is typically understood and practiced. I begin by exploring a much broader yet closely related question: To…Read more
  •  43
    False belief understanding and “cool” inhibitory control in 3-and 4-years-old Italian children
    with Francesca Bellagamba, Elsa Addessi, Valentina Focaroli, Giulia Pecora, Valentina Maggiorelli, and Beatrice Pace
    Frontiers in Psychology 6. 2015.
  •  31
    Trust, relevance, and arguments
    Argument and Computation 5 (2-3): 216-236. 2014.
    This paper outlines an integrated approach to trust and relevance with respect to arguments: in particular, it is suggested that trust in relevance has a central role in argumentation. We first distinguish two types of argumentative relevance: internal relevance, i.e. the extent to which a premise has a bearing on its purported conclusion, and external relevance, i.e. a measure of how much a whole argument is pertinent to the matter under discussion, in the broader dialogical context where it is…Read more
  •  74
    This article, Piaget’s theory of moral development in play behaviour is critically reviewed and framed within the philosophical debate on morality. On this basis, an alternative socio-cognitive model for describing normative evolution in play development is proposed. Special attention is paid to the transition from children’s play to adult games, for the purpose of demonstrating that some relevant features of morality stagnate, rather than progress, during such transition. Finally, some speculat…Read more
  •  68
    Enthymematic parsimony
    with John Woods
    Synthese 178 (3). 2011.
    Enthymemes are traditionally defined as arguments in which some elements are left unstated. It is an empirical fact that enthymemes are both enormously frequent and appropriately understood in everyday argumentation. Why is it so? We outline an answer that dispenses with the so called "principle of charity", which is the standard notion underlying most works on enthymemes. In contrast, we suggest that a different force drives enthymematic argumentation—namely, parsimony, i.e. the tendency to opt…Read more
  •  40
    Modes of action readiness Acceptance accepting presence or interaction Non- acceptance not accepting presence or interaction Attending acquiring information Disinterest not acquiring information Affiliate achieving or accepting close ...
  •  7
    Argumentation is a dialogical attempt to bring about a desired change in the beliefs of another agent – that is, to trigger a specific belief revision process in the mind of such agent. However, so far formal models of belief revision widely neglected any systematic comparison with argumentation theories, to the point that even the simplest argumentation structures cannot be captured within such models. In this essay, we endeavour to bring together argumentation and belief revision in the same f…Read more
  •  17
    Trust, argumentation and technology
    Argument and Computation 5 (2-3): 119-122. 2014.
  •  21
    No more charity, please! Enthymematic parsimony and the pitfall of benevolence
    In 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--26. 2007.
    Why are enthymemes so frequent? Are we dumb arguers, smart rhetoricians, or parsimonious reasoners? This paper investigates systematic use of enthymemes, criticizing the application of the principle of charity to their interpretation. In contrast, I propose to analyze enthymematic argumentation in terms of parsimony, i.e. as a manifestation of the rational tendency to economize over scant resources. Consequences of this view on the current debate on enthymemes and on their rational reconstructio…Read more
  • Abductive Reasoning (review)
    Informal Logic 24 (3): 271-277. 2004.
  •  120
    In this article we strive to provide a detailed and principled analysis of the role of beliefs in goal processing—that is, the cognitive transition that leads from a mere desire to a proper intention. The resulting model of belief-based goal processing has also relevant consequences for the analysis of intentions, and constitutes the necessary core of a constructive theory of intentions, i.e. a framework that not only analyzes what an intention is, but also explains how it becomes what it is. We…Read more
  •  10
    Walton's Abductive Reasoning
    Informal Logic 24 (3). 2004.
  •  21
    People argue to reconcile differences of opinion, but reconciliation may fail to happen. In these cases, most theorists assume arguers are left with the same disagreement from which they started. This is too optimistic, since disagreement might instead escalate, and this may happen because of the argumentative practice, not in spite of it. These dangers depend on epistemological, pragmatic, and cultural factors, and show why arguers should be careful in picking their dialogical fights.
  •  10
    Hansen & Pinto: Reason Reclaimed
    Informal Logic 28 (2): 170-192. 2008.
  •  59
  •  45
  •  2
    The goals of cognition: Essays in honor of Cristiano Castelfranchi (edited book)
    with M. Tummolini, F. Falcone, and M. Miceli
    College Publications. forthcoming.
  •  24
    In this brief commentary of Kamila Debowska-Kozlowska’s insightful analysis of persuasive outcomes (Processing topics from the Beneficial Cognitive Model in partially and over-successful persuasion dialogues. Argumentation, 2014), I articulate some suggestions for future development of her ideas. My main claim is that, while instances of partially and over-successful persuasion are indeed worthy of further theoretical inquiry, the topical analysis proposed by Debowska-Kozlowska may benefit from …Read more
  •  23
    The history of fallacy theory is long, distinguished and, admittedly, checkered. I offer a bird eye view on it, with the aim of contrasting the standard conception of fallacies as attractive and universal errors that are hard to eradicate with the contemporary preoccupation with “non-fallacious fallacies”, that is, arguments that fit the bill of one of the traditional fallacies but are actually respectable enough to be used in appropriate contexts. Godden and Zenker have recently argued that rei…Read more
  •  34
    Conductive Argument, An Overlooked Type of Defeasible Reasoning
    Informal Logic 33 (3): 438-461. 2013.
    Edited by J. Anthony Blair and Ralph H. Johnson King’s College London, UK: College Publications, 2011. Pp. vii, 1-299. Softcover. ISBN: 978-1-84890-030-1. US$ ~20
  •  47
    Why argue? Towards a cost–benefit analysis of argumentation
    Argument and Computation 1 (1): 71-91. 2010.
    This article proposes a cost-benefit analysis of argumentation, with the aim of highlighting the strategic considerations that govern the agent's decision to argue or not. In spite of its paramount importance, the topic of argumentative decision-making has not received substantial attention in argumentation theories so far. We offer an explanation for this lack of consideration and propose a tripartite taxonomy and detailed description of the strategic reasons considered by arguers in their deci…Read more
  •  54
    This topos is focused on intentions, with an emphasis on integrating philosophical analysis and empirical findings. Theorizing about human action has a long history in philosophy, and the nature of intention and intentional action has received a lot of attention in recent analytic philosophy. At the same time, intentional action has become an empirically studied phenomenon in psychology, cognitive neuroscience, artificial intelligence, and robotics. Many results obtained in these areas have been…Read more
  •  64
    Reflections on Plagiarism
    Topoi 34 (1): 1-5. 2015.
    The FactsIt has recently come to light that an article published on this journal in 2007, “On the illuminationist approach to imaginal power: outline of a perspective”, by Mahmoud Khatami, Topoi, 26, 221–229, extensively plagiarized parts of Mikel Dufrenne’s book The phenomenology of aesthetic experience . Entire passages from Sect. 4 of Khatami’s article turned out to be copied from chapter 11 of Dufrenne’s monograph, which was not even included in the list of references. This case of plagiaris…Read more