Schemes, Critical Questions, and Complete Argument Evaluation

Shiyang Yu Nankai University ; Frank Zenker Warsaw University of Technology

Abstract

AbstractAccording to the argument scheme approach, to evaluate a given scheme-saturating instance completely does entail asking all critical questions (CQs) relevant to it. Although this is a central task for argumentation theorists, the field currently lacks a method for providing a complete argument evaluation. Approaching this task at the meta-level, we combine a logical with a substantive approach to the argument schemes by starting from Toulmin’s schema: ‘data, warrant, so claim’. For the yet more general schema: ‘premise(s); if premise(s), then conclusion; so conclusion’, we forward a meta-level CQ-list that is arguably both complete and applicable. This list should inform ongoing theoretical efforts at generating appropriate object-level CQs for specific argument schemes.

Journal
Argumentation
Published
2020-12-01
DOI
10.1007/s10503-020-09512-4
CompPile
Open Access
OA PDF Hybrid
Topics
Export

Citation Context

References (74) · 14 in this index

  1. Elements of argumentation
  2. Argumentation illuminated
  3. Argumentation
  4. Groundwork in the theory of argumentation
  5. Bondarenko, A., P. Dung, R. Kowalski, and F. Toni. 1997. An abstract, argumentation-theoretic approach to def…
    Artificial Intelligence  
Show all 74 →
  1. Bondy, P. 2010. Truth and argument evaluation. Informal Logic 30: 142–158.
    Informal Logic  
  2. Rhetoric in the European tradition
  3. Daniel, S., and D. Nic. 2014. The deflationary theory of truth. In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (F…
  4. Ennis, R. 1982. Identifying implicit assumptions. Synthese 51: 61–86.
    Synthese  
  5. Argumentation and debate: Critical thinking for reasoned decision making
  6. Freeman, J.B. 1985. Dialectical situations and argument analysis. Informal Logic 7: 151–162.
    Informal Logic  
  7. Dialectics and the macrostructure of arguments: A theory of argument structure
  8. Studies in pragma-dialectics
  9. Garssen, B. 1997. Agumentatieschema’s in Pragma-dialectisch Perspectief. Een Theoretisch en Empirisch Onderzo…
  10. Crucial concepts in argumentation theory
  11. Godden, D., and F. Zenker. 2018. A probabilistic analysis of argument cogency. Synthese 195: 1715–1740.
    Synthese  
  12. Goodnight, G.T. 1993. Legitimation inferences: An additional component for the Toulmin model. Informal Logic …
    Informal Logic  
  13. Gough, J., and C. Tindale. 1985. ‘Hidden’ or ‘missing’ premises. Informal Logic 7: 99–106.
    Informal Logic  
  14. A practical study of argument
  15. Informal logic: Issues and techniques
  16. Hahn, U., and J. Hornikx. 2016. A normative framework for argument quality: Argumentation schemes with a Baye…
    Synthese  
  17. Hastings, A.C. 1962. A reformulation of the modes of reasoning in argumentation. Dissertation. Northwestern U…
  18. Anyone who has a view. Theoretical contributions to the study of argumentation
  19. Arguing on the Toulmin model. New essays in argument analysis and evaluation
  20. On reasoning and argument: Essays in Informal Logic and Critical Thinking
  21. Arguing on the Toulmin model. New essays in argument analysis and evaluation
  22. Keeping in touch with pragma-dialectics
  23. Argumentation
  24. Argumentation
  25. Manifest rationality: A pragmatic theory of argument
  26. Johnson, R.H., and J.A. Blair 1994. Logical self-defense (U.S. edition). New York: McGraw-Hill.
  27. Kienpointner, M. 1992. Alltagslogik. Struktur und Funktion von Argumentationsmustern [Everyday Logic. Structu…
  28. Lumer, C. 2011. Argument schemes—An epistemological approach. In Argumentation: Cognition and community. Proc…
  29. Argumentation
  30. Argumentation
  31. On law and reason
  32. Perelman, C., and L. Olbrechts-Tyteca. 1958. La nouvelle rhétorique. Traité de l’argumentation. Paris: Presse…
  33. New essays in informal logic
  34. Pollock, J.L. 1987. Defeasible reasoning. Cognitive Science 11: 481–518.
    Cognitive Science  
  35. Cognitive carpentry. A blueprint for how to build a person
  36. Argumentation
  37. Prakken, H. 2010. On the nature of argument schemes. In Dialectics, dialogue and argumentation. An examinatio…
  38. Argumentation
  39. Rigotti, E., and S. Greco Morasso. 2006. Topics: The argument generator. In Argumentation for financial commu…
  40. Argumentation and education: Theoretical foundations and practices
  41. Argumentation
  42. Ars Topica. The classical technique of constructing arguments from Aristotle to Cicero
  43. Argumentatie en debat
  44. Fallacies and argument appraisal
  45. Toulmin, S. E. (2003; 1958). The uses of argument (Updated ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (1st e…
  46. An introduction to reasoning
  47. van Eemeren, F.H., and T. Kruiger. 1987. Identifying argumentation schemes. In Argumentation: Perspectives an…
  48. Argumentation
  49. Prototypical argumentative patterns. Exploring the relationship between argumentative dis…
  50. Argumentation theory: A pragma-dialectical perspective
  51. Handbook of argumentation theory
  52. Argumentation, communication, and fallacies
  53. A systematic theory of argumentation. The pragma-dialectical approach
  54. Argumentation
  55. Verheij, B. 2003. Dialectical argumentation with argumentation schemes: An approach to legal logic. Artificia…
    Artificial Intelligence and Law  
  56. Arguing on the Toulmin model. New essays in argument analysis and evaluation
  57. Verheij, B. 2014. Arguments and their strength: Revisiting Pollock’s anti-probabilistic starting points. In C…
  58. Vreeswijk, G. 1997. Abstract argumentation systems. Artificial Intelligence 90: 225–279.
    Artificial Intelligence  
  59. Wagemans, J.H.M. 2016. Constructing a periodic table of arguments. In Argumentation, objectivity, and bias. P…
  60. Wagemans, J.H.M. 2019. Four basic argument forms. Research in Language 17: 57–69.
    Research in Language  
  61. Argumentation schemes for presumptive reasoning
  62. Argumentation
  63. Argumentation schemes
  64. Argumentation
  65. Argumentation
  66. Argumentation
  67. Yu, S., and F. Zenker. 2019. A dialectical view on conduction: Reasons, warrants, and normal suasory inclinat…
    Informal Logic  
  68. Ceteris Paribus in conservative belief revision
  69. Zenker, F. 2018. Logic, reasoning, argumentation: Insights from the wild. Logic and Logical Philosophy 27: 421–451.
    Logic and Logical Philosophy