Classifying the Patterns of Natural Arguments

Fabrizio Macagno Universidade Nova de Lisboa ; Douglas Walton University of Windsor

Abstract

AbstractThe representation and classification of the structure of natural arguments has been one of the most important aspects of Aristotelian and medieval dialectical and rhetorical theories. This traditional approach is represented nowadays in models of argumentation schemes. The purpose of this article is to show how arguments are characterized by a complex combination of two levels of abstraction, namely, semantic relations and types of reasoning, and to provide an effective and comprehensive classification system for this matrix of semantic and quasilogical connections. To this purpose, we propose a dichotomous criterion of classification, transcending both levels of abstraction and representing not what an argument is but how it is understood and interpreted. The schemes are grouped according to an end-means criterion, which is strictly bound to the ontological structure of the conclusion and the premises. On this view, a scheme can be selected according to the intended or reconstructed purpose of an argument and the possible strategies that can be used to achieve it.

Journal
Philosophy & Rhetoric
Published
2015-02-01
DOI
10.5325/philrhet.48.1.0026
Open Access
Closed
Topics

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (1)

  1. Philosophy & Rhetoric

Cites in this index (0)

No references match articles in this index.

Also cites 27 works outside this index ↓
  1. Duschl, Richard. 2008. “Science Education in Three-Part Harmony: Balancing Conceptual, Epistemic, and Social …
  2. Eemeren, Frans H. van, and Rob Grootendorst. 2004. A Systematic Theory of Argumentation: The Pragma-Dialectic…
  3. Elster, Jon. 1999. Alchemies of the Mind: Rationality and the Emotions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  4. Godden, David. 2005. “Deductivism as an Interpretive Strategy: A Reply to Groarke's Defense of Reconstructive…
  5. Greenland, Sander. 1998. “Probability Logic and Probabilistic Induction.”Epidemiology9 (3): 322–32.
  6. Green-Pedersen, Niels. 1984. The Tradition of Topics in the Middle Age. Munich: Philosophia.
  7. Grennan, Wayne. 1997. Informal Logic. Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press.
  8. Hitchcock, David, and Jean Wagemans. 2011. “The Pragma-Dialectical Account of Argument Schemes.” In Keeping i…
  9. Juthe, André. 2005. “Argument by Analogy.”Argumentation19 (1): 1–27.
  10. Kempson, Ruth. 1973. “Presupposition: A Problem for Linguistic Theory.”Transactions of the Philological Socie…
  11. Macagno, Fabrizio. 2014. “Analogy and Redefinition.” In Systematic Approaches to Argument by Analogy, ed. Hen…
  12. Macagno, Fabrizio, and Aikaterina Konstantinidou. 2013. “What Students' Arguments Can Tell Us: Using Argument…
  13. Macagno, Fabrizio, and Douglas Walton. 2009. “Argument from Analogy in Law, the Classical Tradition, and Rece…
  14. Macagno, Fabrizio, and Douglas Walton. 2014. Emotive Language in Argumentation. New York: Cambridge Universit…
  15. Macagno, Fabrizio, and Benedetta Zavatta. 2014. “Reconstructing Metaphorical Meaning.”Argumentation28 (4): 453–88.
  16. Mochales Palau, Raquel, and Marie-Francine Moens. 2009. “Argumentation Mining: The Detection, Classification,…
  17. Mochales Palau, Raquel, and Marie-Francine Moens. 2011. “Argumentation Mining.”Artificial Intelligence and La…
  18. Nussbaum, Michael. 2011. “Argumentation, Dialogue Theory, and Probability Modeling: An Alternative Framework …
  19. Rapanta, Chrysi, Merce Garcia-Mila, and Sandra Gilabert. 2013. “What Is Meant by Argumentative Competence? An…
  20. Reed, Chris, Douglas Walton, and Fabrizio Macagno. 2007. “Argument Diagramming in Logic, Artificial Intellige…
  21. Rigotti, Eddo. 2006. “Relevance of Context-bound Loci to Topical Potential in the Argumentation Stage.”Argume…
  22. Rigotti, Eddo. 2009. “Whether and How Classical Topics Can Be Revived in the Contemporary Theory of Argumenta…
  23. Searle, John. 2001. Rationality in Action. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  24. Song, Yi, and Ralph Ferretti. 2013. “Teaching Critical Questions About Argumentation Through the Revising Pro…
  25. Von Wright, Georg Henrik. 1963. “Practical Inference.”Philosophical Review72 (2): 159–79.
  26. Walton, Douglas, Chris Reed, and Fabrizio Macagno. 2008. Argumentation Schemes. New York: Cambridge Universit…
  27. Walton, Douglas, and Fabrizio Macagno. 2010. “Defeasible Classifications and Inferences from Definitions.”Inf…
CrossRef global citation count: 34 View in citation network →