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
CompPile
Search in CompPile ↗
Open Access
Closed
Topics
Export

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (2)

  1. Philosophy & Rhetoric
  2. Argumentation

References (41) · 4 in this index

  1. Asher, Nicholas, and Alex Lascarides. 2003. Logics of Conversation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  2. Blair, Anthony. 2007. “The ‘Logic’ of Informal Logic.” In Dissensus and the Search for Common Ground, ed. Han…
  3. Duschl, Richard. 2008. “Science Education in Three-Part Harmony: Balancing Conceptual, Epistemic, and Social …
  4. Eemeren, Frans H. van, and Rob Grootendorst. 1992. Argumentation, Communication, and Fallacies. Hillsdale, NJ…
  5. Eemeren, Frans H. van, and Rob Grootendorst. 2004. A Systematic Theory of Argumentation: The Pragma-Dialectic…
Show all 41 →
  1. Elster, Jon. 1999. Alchemies of the Mind: Rationality and the Emotions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  2. Garssen, Bart. 2001. “Argumentation Schemes.” In Crucial Concepts in Argumentation Theory, ed. Frans H. van E…
  3. Godden, David. 2005. “Deductivism as an Interpretive Strategy: A Reply to Groarke's Defense of Reconstructive…
  4. Greenland, Sander. 1998. “Probability Logic and Probabilistic Induction.”Epidemiology9 (3): 322–32.
  5. Green-Pedersen, Niels. 1984. The Tradition of Topics in the Middle Age. Munich: Philosophia.
  6. Grennan, Wayne. 1997. Informal Logic. Montreal: McGill-Queen's University Press.
  7. Hastings, Arthur. 1963. A Reformulation of the Modes of Reasoning in Argumentation. PhD diss., Northwestern U…
  8. Hitchcock, David, and Jean Wagemans. 2011. “The Pragma-Dialectical Account of Argument Schemes.” In Keeping i…
  9. Josephson, John, and Susan Josephson. 1996. Abductive Inference: Computation, Philosophy, Technology. New Yor…
  10. Argumentation
  11. Kempson, Ruth. 1973. “Presupposition: A Problem for Linguistic Theory.”Transactions of the Philological Socie…
  12. Kienpointner, Manfred. 1992a. Alltagslogik: Struktur und Funktion von Argumentationsmustern. Stuttgart: Fromm…
  13. Kienpointner, Manfred. 1992b. “How to Classify Arguments.” In Argumentation Illuminated, ed. Frans H. van Eem…
  14. Kim, Mijung, Robert Anthony, and David Blades. 2012. “Argumentation as a Tool to Understand Complexity of Kno…
  15. Macagno, Fabrizio. 2014. “Analogy and Redefinition.” In Systematic Approaches to Argument by Analogy, ed. Hen…
  16. Argumentation
  17. Macagno, Fabrizio, and Douglas Walton. 2009. “Argument from Analogy in Law, the Classical Tradition, and Rece…
  18. Macagno, Fabrizio, and Douglas Walton. 2014. Emotive Language in Argumentation. New York: Cambridge Universit…
  19. Argumentation
  20. Mochales Palau, Raquel, and Marie-Francine Moens. 2009. “Argumentation Mining: The Detection, Classification,…
  21. Mochales Palau, Raquel, and Marie-Francine Moens. 2011. “Argumentation Mining.”Artificial Intelligence and La…
  22. Nussbaum, Michael. 2011. “Argumentation, Dialogue Theory, and Probability Modeling: An Alternative Framework …
  23. Peirce, Charles S. 1992. Reasoning and the Logic of Things: The Cambridge Conferences Lectures of 1898. Ed. K…
  24. Perelman, Chaïm, and Lucie Olbrechts-Tyteca. 1969. The New Rhetoric: A Treatise on Argumentation. Trans. John…
  25. Poole, Charles. 1988. “Induction Does Not Exist in Epidemiology, Either.” In Causal Inference, ed. Kenneth Ro…
  26. Rapanta, Chrysi, Merce Garcia-Mila, and Sandra Gilabert. 2013. “What Is Meant by Argumentative Competence? An…
  27. Reed, Chris, Douglas Walton, and Fabrizio Macagno. 2007. “Argument Diagramming in Logic, Artificial Intellige…
  28. Rigotti, Eddo. 2005. “Congruity Theory and Argumentation.”Studies in Communication Sciences (special issue): 75–96.
  29. Argumentation
  30. Rigotti, Eddo. 2009. “Whether and How Classical Topics Can Be Revived in the Contemporary Theory of Argumenta…
  31. Searle, John. 2001. Rationality in Action. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  32. Song, Yi, and Ralph Ferretti. 2013. “Teaching Critical Questions About Argumentation Through the Revising Pro…
  33. Von Wright, Georg Henrik. 1963. “Practical Inference.”Philosophical Review72 (2): 159–79.
  34. Walton, Douglas. 1996. Argumentation Schemes for Presumptive Reasoning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  35. Walton, Douglas, Chris Reed, and Fabrizio Macagno. 2008. Argumentation Schemes. New York: Cambridge Universit…
  36. Walton, Douglas, and Fabrizio Macagno. 2010. “Defeasible Classifications and Inferences from Definitions.”Inf…