•  60
    In this paper, we use a pseudo-algorithmic procedure for assessing an AI-generated text. We apply the Comprehensive Assessment Procedure for Natural Argumentation (CAPNA) in evaluating the arguments produced by an Artificial Intelligence text generator, GPT-3, in an opinion piece written for the Guardian newspaper. The CAPNA examines instances of argumentation in three aspects: their Process, Reasoning and Expression. Initial Analysis is conducted using the Argument Type Identification Procedure…Read more
  •  39
    Mizrahi and Seidel: Experts in Confusion
    Informal Logic 35 (4): 539-554. 2015.
    In this paper I describe the apparent differences between the views of Mizrahi and Seidel on the strength of arguments from expert opinion. I show that most of Seidel's objections rely on an understanding of the words 'expert' and 'opinion' different from those which Mizrahi employs. I also discuss certain inconsistencies found in both papers over the use of these key terms. The paper concludes by noting that Mizrahi is right to suggest that evidence shows expert predictions to be unreliable, bu…Read more
  •  33
    Introduction to the Issue: The Philosophy of Argumentation
    Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric 55 (1): 7-10. 2018.
  •  30
    Warsaw Argumentation Week (Waw 2018) Organised by the Polish School of Argumentation and Our Colleagues from Germany and the UK, 6th-16th September 2018 (review)
    with Katarzyna Budzynska, Michał Araszkiewicz, Agnieszka Budzyńska-Daca, John Lawrence, Sanjay Modgil, Matthias Thimm, Jacky Visser, Tomasz Żurek, Marcin Koszowy, Katie Atkinson, Kamila Dębowska-Kozłowska, Magdalena Kacprzak, Paweł Łupkowski, Barłomiej Skowron, Mariusz Urbański, and Maria Załęska
    Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric 55 (1): 231-239. 2018.
    In September 2018, the ArgDiaP association, along with colleagues from Germany and the UK, organised one of the longest and most interdisciplinary series of events ever dedicated to argumentation - Warsaw Argumentation Week, WAW 2018. The eleven-day ‘week’ featured a five day graduate school on computational and linguistic perspectives on argumentation (3rd SSA school); five workshops: on systems and algorithms for formal argumentation (2nd SAFA), argumentation in relation to society (1st ArgSoc…Read more
  •  26
    On Arguments from Ignorance
    Informal Logic 38 (2): 184-212. 2018.
    The purpose of this paper is twofold: to give a good account of the argument from ignorance, with a presumptive argumentation scheme, and to raise issues on the work of Walton, the nature of abduction and the concept of epistemic closure. First, I offer a brief disambiguation of how the terms 'argument from ignorance' and 'argumentum ad ignorantiam' are used. Second, I show how attempts to embellish this form of reasoning by Douglas Walton and A.J. Kreider have been unnecessary and unhelpful. La…Read more
  •  25
    Corpus Linguistics Methods in the Study of (Meta)Argumentation
    Argumentation 35 (3): 435-455. 2020.
    As more and more sophisticated software is created to allow the mining of arguments from natural language texts, this paper sets out to examine the suitability of the well-established and readily available methods of corpus linguistics to the study of argumentation. After brief introductions to corpus linguistics and the concept of meta-argument, I describe three pilot-studies into the use of the terms Straw man, Ad hominem, and Slippery slope, made using the open access News on the Web corpus. …Read more
  •  23
    Overcoming Disagreement Through Ordering: Building an Epistemic Hierarchy
    Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric 55 (1): 77-91. 2018.
    This paper begins with an assessment of the origin of the term ‘deep disagreement’ to reflect fundamental differences in argument procedure and suggests an alternative explanation of such stalemates that may apply in many cases and does lead to a possible resolution strategy, through discussion of the ordering of certain principles, rather than their acceptance or rejection. Similarities are then drawn with disputes which are supported by conflicting expert opinions and I lay out the advantages …Read more
  •  22
    Why the Fence Is the Seat of Reason When Experts Disagree
    Social Epistemology 33 (2): 160-171. 2019.
    ABSTRACTIn order to properly understand how expert disagreement should be dealt with, it is essential to grasp how expert opinion is used in the reasoning process by which humans reach conclusions and make decisions. This paper utilises the tools of argumentation theory, specifically Douglas Walton’s argument schemes, and variations upon them, in order to examine how patterns of reasoning are affected by the presence of conflicting testimony. This study suggests that although it may be supplemen…Read more
  •  19
    This volume is concerned with issues in experimental philosophy and experimental linguistics. Examining experiments in language from a variety of perspectives, it asks what form they should take and what should count as evidence. There is particular focus on the status of linguistic intuitions and the use of language corpora. A number of papers address issues of methodology in experimental work, while other contributions examine the use of thought experiments and what the hypothetical can tell u…Read more
  •  19
    In this paper, we formulate a procedure for assessing reasoning as it is expressed in natural arguments. The procedure is a specification of one of the three aspects of argumentation assessment distinguished in the Comprehensive Assessment Procedure for Natural Argumentation that makes use of the argument categorisation framework of the Periodic Table of Arguments. The theoretical framework and practical application of both the CAPNA and the PTA are described, as well as the evaluation procedure…Read more
  •  17
    Slippery Slopes and Other Consequences
    Logic and Logical Philosophy. forthcoming.
  •  12
    On Appeals to Non-existent Authorities as Arguments from Analogy
    Informal Logic 41 (4): 579-606. 2021.
    Herein, I consider arguments resting on an appeal to a non-existent authority as a species of argument from authority, and ultimately show them to be reliant on arguments from analogy in their inferential force. Three sub-types of argument are discussed: from authorities as yet unborn, no longer living, or incapable of ever doing so. In each case it is shown that an element of arguing from analogy is required since there can be no direct evidence of any assertions of the source. In conclusion, i…Read more
  •  8
    This two-volume collection showcases a wide range of modern approaches to the philosophical study of language. Contributions illustrate how these strands of research are interconnected and show the importance of such a broad outlook. The aim is to throw light upon some of the key questions in language and communication and also to inspire, inform, and integrate a community of researchers in philosophical linguistics. Volume one concentrates on fundamental theoretical topics. This means consideri…Read more
  •  8
    The Platform Fallacy: A Dickensian Contribution to Informal Logic
    Philosophy and Literature 44 (2): 449-460. 2020.
    ARRAY
  •  6
    Arguments may sometimes be advanced with a non-standard function. One such function, it is suggested, is the expression of identity, a practice which may play a significant role in political representation. This paper sets out to examine a number of short addresses given at the High-Level segment of the Cop26 conference, which are considered to contain instances of such argumentation. Their content is analysed and evaluated by means of the Comprehensive Assessment Procedure for Natural Argumenta…Read more
  •  5
    Slippery Slopes Revisited
    Studia Semiotyczne 34 (2): 9-24. 2020.
    The aims of this paper are to illustrate where previous attempts at the characterisation of slippery slope arguments have gone wrong, to provide an analysis which better captures their true nature, and to show the importance of achieving a clear definition which distinguishes this argument structure from other forms with which it may be confused. The first part describes the arguments of Douglas Walton and others, which are found wanting due to their failure to capture the essence of the slipper…Read more
  •  5
    On Appeals to Non-existent Authorities as Arguments from Analogy
    Informal Logic 42 (3): 579-606. 2021.
    Herein, I consider arguments resting on an appeal to a non-existent authority as a species of argument from authority, and ultimately show them to be reliant on arguments from analogy in their inferential force. Three sub-types of argument are discussed: from authorities as yet unborn, no longer living, or incapable of ever doing so. In each case it is shown that an element of arguing from analogy is required since there can be no direct evidence of any assertions of the source. In conclusion, i…Read more
  • The philosophy of argumentation (edited book)
    University of Białystok. 2018.
  • Warsaw Argumentation Week (WAW 2018) organised by the Polish School of Argumentation and our colleagues from Germany and the UW, 6th-16th September 2018 (review)
    with Katarzyna Budzynska, Marcin Koszowy, Michał Araszkiewisz, Katie Atkinson, Agnieszka Bydzyńska-Daca, Kamila Dębowska-Kozłowska, Magdalena Kacprzak, John Lawrence, Paweł Łupkowski, Sanjay Modgil, Barłomiej Skowron, Matthias Thimm, Mariusz Urbański, Jacky Visser, Maria Załęska, and Tomasz Żurek
    In Martin Hinton & Marcin Koszowy (eds.), The philosophy of argumentation, University of Białystok. 2018.
  • Introduction to the issue: the philosophy of argumentation
    with Marci Koszowy
    In Martin Hinton & Marcin Koszowy (eds.), The philosophy of argumentation, University of Białystok. 2018.
  • Overcoming disagreement through ordering: building an epistemic hierarchy
    In Martin Hinton & Marcin Koszowy (eds.), The philosophy of argumentation, University of Białystok. 2018.