•  2
    Response to my commentator
    Proceedings of the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation Conference 10. 2013.
    N/A.
  •  11
    Introduction: Theoretical and Technological Perspectives on Online Arguments
    with Chris Reed and Fabio Paglieri
    Philosophy and Technology 30 (2): 131-135. 2017.
  •  6
    Virtue argumentation theory has been charged of being incomplete, given its alleged inability to account for argument cogency in virtue-theoretical terms. Instead of defending VAT against that challenge, I suggest it is misplaced, since it is based on a premise VAT does not endorse, and raises an issue that most versions of VAT need not consider problematic. This in turn allows distinguishing several varieties of VAT, and clarifying what really matters for them.
  • The psychology of argument: Cognitive approaches to argumentation and persuasion (edited book)
    with Laura Bonelli and Silvia Felletti
    College Publications. 2016.
  •  6
    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
  •  35
  •  20
    True to its sensorimotor inspiration, Hurley's shared circuits model (SCM) describes goal-states only within a homeostatic mechanism for action control, neglecting to consider other functions of goals control freaks.”
  • Abductive Reasoning (review)
    Informal Logic 24 (3): 271-277. 2004.
  •  31
    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
  •  24
    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
  •  67
    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
  •  58
    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
  •  31
    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 ...
  •  33
    Waiting by mistake: Symbolic representation of rewards modulates intertemporal choice in capuchin monkeys, preschool children and adult humans
    with Elsa Addessi, Francesca Bellagamba, Alexia Delfino, Francesca De Petrillo, Valentina Focaroli, Luigi Macchitella, Valentina Maggiorelli, Beatrice Pace, Giulia Pecora, Sabrina Rossi, Agnese Sbaffi, and Maria Isabella Tasselli
    Cognition 130 (3): 428-441. 2014.
  •  12
    Trust, argumentation and technology
    Argument and Computation 5 (2-3): 119-122. 2014.
  •  17
    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
  •  14
    Virtue argumentation theory has been charged of being incomplete, given its alleged inability to account for argument cogency in virtue-theoretical terms. Instead of defending VAT against that challenge, I suggest it is misplaced, since it is based on a premise VAT does not endorse, and raises an issue that most versions of VAT need not consider problematic. This in turn allows distinguishing several varieties of VAT, and clarifying what really matters for them.
  •  9
    A test of the argument engagement model in Romania
    with Ioana Cionea, Dale Hample, and Lilian Bermejo-Luque
    Hample, Paglieri, and Na’s model of argument engagement proposes that people en-gage in arguments when they perceive the benefits of arguing to be greater than the costs of doing so. This paper tests the model in Romania, a different culture than the one in which the model was developed, by using a 2 x 2 design.
  •  9
    Walton's Abductive Reasoning
    Informal Logic 24 (3). 2004.
  •  8
    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.
  •  9
    Hansen & Pinto: Reason Reclaimed
    Informal Logic 28 (2): 170-192. 2008.
  •  51
  •  8
    From a decision theoretic perspective, arguments stem from decisions made by arguers. Despite some promising results, this approach remains underdeveloped in argumentation theories, mostly because it is assumed to be merely descriptive. This assumption is mistaken: considering arguments as the product of decisions brings into play various normative models of rational choice. The challenge is rather to reconcile strategic rationality with other normative constraints relevant for argumentation, su…Read more
  •  17
    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.
  •  1
    The goals of cognition: Essays in honor of Cristiano Castelfranchi (edited book)
    with M. Tummolini, F. Falcone, and M. Miceli
    College Publications. forthcoming.