Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Arts and Humanities Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 31 - 60 of 77

Full-Text Articles in Arts and Humanities

Good Reasoning On The Toulmin Model, David Hitchcock Jun 2005

Good Reasoning On The Toulmin Model, David Hitchcock

OSSA Conference Archive

Some solo verbal reasoning serves the function of arriving at a correct answer to a question from information at the reasoner’s disposal. Such reasoning is good if and only if its grounds are justified and adequate, its warrant is justified, and the reasoner is justified in assuming that no defeaters apply. I distinguish seven sources of justified grounds and state the conditions under which each source is trustworthy. Adequate grounds include all good relevant information practically obtainable by the reasoner. The claim must follow from the grounds in accordance with a justified general warrant. If this warrant is not ...


Political Cartoons In A Stephen Toulmin Landscape, Leo Groarke Jun 2005

Political Cartoons In A Stephen Toulmin Landscape, Leo Groarke

OSSA Conference Archive

No abstract provided.


The Informal Use Of Reductio Ad Absurdum, Henrike Jansen Jun 2005

The Informal Use Of Reductio Ad Absurdum, Henrike Jansen

OSSA Conference Archive

No abstract provided.


The Nature And Status Of Critical Questions In Argumentation Schemes, Douglas Walton, David M. Godden Jun 2005

The Nature And Status Of Critical Questions In Argumentation Schemes, Douglas Walton, David M. Godden

OSSA Conference Archive

The Nature and Status of Critical Questions in Argumentation Schemes


Eight Theses Reflecting On Stephen Toulmin, John Woods Jun 2005

Eight Theses Reflecting On Stephen Toulmin, John Woods

OSSA Conference Archive

I discuss eight theses espoused or occasioned by Toulmin: (1) The validity standard is nearly always the wrong standard for real-life reasoning. (2) Little in good reasoning is topic neutral. (3) The probability calculus distorts much probabilistic reasoning. (4) Scant resources have a benign influence on human reasoning. (5) Theoretical progress and conceptual change are connected. (6) Logic should investigate the cognitive aspects of reasoning and arguing. (7) Ideal models are unsuitable for normativity. (8) The role of the Can Do Principle.


Toulmin-Based Computational Modelling Of Judicial Discretion In Sentencing, Andrew Vincent, John Zaleznikow Jun 2005

Toulmin-Based Computational Modelling Of Judicial Discretion In Sentencing, Andrew Vincent, John Zaleznikow

OSSA Conference Archive

A number of increasingly sophisticated technologies are now being used to support complex decision-making in a range of contexts. This paper reports on work undertaken to provide decision support in the discretionary domain of sentencing by referring to a recently created Toulmin argument based model that involves the interplay and weighting of relevant rule-based and discretionary factors used in a decisional process. Judicial discretion, particularly in the sentencing phase, is one of the mainstays of justice systems that favour individualised justice. The study discusses the modelling process in Victorian courts in Australia, where the handing down of an appropriate custodial ...


Using Toulmin Argumentation To Develop An Online Dispute Resolution Environment, John Zeleznikow Jun 2005

Using Toulmin Argumentation To Develop An Online Dispute Resolution Environment, John Zeleznikow

OSSA Conference Archive

Our goal is to model reasoning in discretionary legal domains. To do so, we use Knowledge Discovery from Database Techniques. However there are obstacles to this approach, including difficulties in generating explanations once conclusions have been inferred, difficulties associated with the collection of sufficient data from past cases and difficulties associated with integrating two vastly different paradigms. Toulmin’s treatise on the uses of argument can be gainfully employed to construct legal decision support systems in discretionary domains. We show how we can use Toulmin’s approach to build such systems with examples taken from the domains of eligibility for ...


Political Reasonableness: A Content Analysis Of The New York Times 1860-2004, Darrin Hicks, Robert Margesson, Kristine Warrenburg Jun 2005

Political Reasonableness: A Content Analysis Of The New York Times 1860-2004, Darrin Hicks, Robert Margesson, Kristine Warrenburg

OSSA Conference Archive

This paper reports the preliminary results of a content analysis of the use and functions of reasonableness in the New York Times editorial page from 1860-2004. We begin by setting out several reasons why we should devote our critical attention to the concept of reasonableness. We then justify our choice of the New York Times editorial page and describe our sample and analytic method. The body of the paper reports three results. First, the primary meanings of the concept are detailed. These include prudence, rationality, fairness, and appropriateness. Second, a distinction between an epistemic and a non-epistemic function of the ...


Warranting Arguments, The Virtue Of Verb, James Francisca Klumpp Jun 2005

Warranting Arguments, The Virtue Of Verb, James Francisca Klumpp

OSSA Conference Archive

The Uses of Argument presented Stephen Toulmin’s call for a working logic and the classical statement of his layout of argument. In chapter 3, which explicated the model, each element was defined using multiple strategies. Toulmin presented his terminology both as a category system for labeling statements or propositions and as a functional vocabulary to describe ‘what . . . is involved in establishing conclusions by the production of arguments’ (97). These two uses of the vocabulary did not come together seamlessly in his account, however. Nor have they done so in subsequent work. Interpretations and elaborations of the Toulmin model, including ...


Truth And Storytelling: Some Hidden Arguments, Trudy Govier Jun 2005

Truth And Storytelling: Some Hidden Arguments, Trudy Govier

OSSA Conference Archive

This paper explores the relationship between narrative and argument in the context of ‘telling our stories’, a common aspect of processes of political reconciliation. Truth commissions and informal workshops often emphasize the telling of stories as a means of providing a sense of the experiences of persons affected by political conflict. Such stories, or narratives, may provide a powerful tool in reconciliation processes, given that they provide a basis for acknowledgement, understanding and empathy. However the power of narrative in such contexts does not eliminate the need for the exploration and evaluation of arguments for contested claims, and there is ...


The Uses Of Argument In Mathematics, Andrew Aberdein Jun 2005

The Uses Of Argument In Mathematics, Andrew Aberdein

OSSA Conference Archive

Stephen Toulmin once observed that ‘it has never been customary for philosophers to pay much attention to the rhetoric of mathematical debate’ (Toulmin & al., 1979, p. 89). Might the application of Toulmin’s layout of arguments to mathematics remedy this oversight? Toulmin’s critics fault the layout as requiring so much abstraction as to permit incompatible reconstructions. Mathematical proofs may indeed be represented by fundamentally distinct layouts. However, cases of genuine conflict characteristically reflect an underlying disagreement about the nature of the proof in question.


The Overall Evaluation Of Arguments: How Probable/Acceptable Is A Conclusion Given The Evaluation Of The Truth And Support Of Its Reasons?, Claude Gratton Jun 2005

The Overall Evaluation Of Arguments: How Probable/Acceptable Is A Conclusion Given The Evaluation Of The Truth And Support Of Its Reasons?, Claude Gratton

OSSA Conference Archive

: I explore the logic of counterexamples by possible conjunction in order to extend their use to estimate the degree of support of premises; address some problems with my proposal; discuss some ways of teaching this extended use; and argue that conditional probability fails to express the degree of support of premises. The scant literature on this topic sometimes presents the degree of support of premises P1…Pn for conclusion C in terms of conditional probability, Pr(C/ P1…Pn). I will argue that the degree of support is better expressed by the probability of the conditional statement expressing the inference ...


Theory And Practice Again: Challenges From Pinto And Toulmin, Ralph H. Johnson Jun 2005

Theory And Practice Again: Challenges From Pinto And Toulmin, Ralph H. Johnson

OSSA Conference Archive

In Argument, Inference and Dialectic (2001) Pinto argues that critical practice can furnish us with the necessary guidance to answer our questions about argument and inference; we do not need to develop a theory of argument/inference. Pinto’s provocative remarks raise questions about the appeal to practice, and recall problems that Toulmin encounters in development of his innovative theory in The Uses of Argument (1958). In this paper, I juxtapose and reflect on these developments.


The Toulmin Model And Non-Monotonic Reasoning, William Keith Jun 2005

The Toulmin Model And Non-Monotonic Reasoning, William Keith

OSSA Conference Archive

While the nature of warrants is unclear in both Toulmin’s Uses of Argument and in textbook pedagogy based on it, the theory of non-monotonic reasoning could clarify and enhance our understanding of warrants.


Types Of Warrant In Practical Reasoning, Christian Kock Jun 2005

Types Of Warrant In Practical Reasoning, Christian Kock

OSSA Conference Archive

The concept of warrant reflects Toulmin's general insights that validity in reasoning comes in many forms, and that reasoning in most fields cannot possess the necessity and certainty characteristic of the 'Rationalist' paradigm. However, there is a scarcity of concepts in one part of Toulmin's theory of argument. While the pedagogical applications of Toulmin's model offer a fine-grained system of warrant types for propositions (sign warrants, causal warrants, etc.), they have only one category of warrant for practical claims (proposals for action) – the 'motivational' warrant. Fortunately, ancient rhetorical thinking can help us correct this insufficiency. For example ...


Leibniz And Toulmin: Rationalism Without Dogmas (Pluralism, Pragmatism, And Gradualism), Txetxu Ausin Jun 2005

Leibniz And Toulmin: Rationalism Without Dogmas (Pluralism, Pragmatism, And Gradualism), Txetxu Ausin

OSSA Conference Archive

The aim of this paper is to connect Leibniz’s and Toulmin’s conceptions about practical and deliberative rationality. When trying to rationally justify contingent judgments Leibniz, like Toulmin, defends a weighing argumentative method. Thus, in Leibniz we can discern the balance between the legitimate demands of formal models of rationality and the lessons of a practice “situated” on a historical, social, and evaluative context (theoria cum praxi).


Toulmin’S Model Of Argument And The Question Of Relativism, Lilian Bermejo-Luque Jun 2005

Toulmin’S Model Of Argument And The Question Of Relativism, Lilian Bermejo-Luque

OSSA Conference Archive

In The Uses of Argument, Toulmin proposed a distinction between field-dependent and field-invariant standards for argument appraisal that gave rise to a relativistic understanding of his theory. The main goal of this paper is to show that epistemological relativism is not a necessary consequence of Toulmin's model of argument. To this end, I will analyze the role that fields are to play within this model, given a certain conception of one of its key elements: the warrant of an argument.


Applied Epistemology And Argumentation In Epidemiology, Mark Battersby Jun 2005

Applied Epistemology And Argumentation In Epidemiology, Mark Battersby

OSSA Conference Archive

On other occasions I have argued that ‘informal logic’ should not really be seen as a kind of ‘weak’ form of logic, but rather as ‘applied epistemology.’ This categorization is intended to create an analogy with applied ethics. Applied ethics has created a robust research project and stimulated ethical thinking both in and outside philosophy. As with applied ethics, I believe that as philosophers explore the actual application of their principles and theories (ethical or epistemological) they will discover new insights into the powers and limitations of their theories. Application is not just about philosophy being ‘useful,’ it is also ...


The Commitments Speakers Undertake In Giving Testimony, Fred J. Kauffeld, John E. Fields Jun 2005

The Commitments Speakers Undertake In Giving Testimony, Fred J. Kauffeld, John E. Fields

OSSA Conference Archive

We sketch and defend a Commitment View of testimony. Unlike alternative approaches, we focus on the ordinary act of testifying, attempting (i) to identify the commitments essential to this speech act and (ii) to explain why those commitments are practically necessary. In view of this account, we argue that given the commitments undertaken in testifying, a speaker’s testimony can qualify as evidence.


Some Axioms Underlying Argumentation Theory, George Boger Jun 2005

Some Axioms Underlying Argumentation Theory, George Boger

OSSA Conference Archive

This paper examines whether philosophers of argument, in spite of their disavowing ‘timeless principles’, nevertheless embrace a set of principles, or axioms, to underlie argumentation theory. First, it reviews the thinking of some prominent philosophers of argument; second, it extracts some principles common to their philosophies; and third, it draws out possible consequences for argumentation theory and asks whether such theory has an underlying political posture.


Ordinary Language Users' Assessments Of Misuse Of Argument Schemes, Frans H. Van Eemeren, Bart Garssen, Bert Meuffels Jun 2005

Ordinary Language Users' Assessments Of Misuse Of Argument Schemes, Frans H. Van Eemeren, Bart Garssen, Bert Meuffels

OSSA Conference Archive

In a series of experimental studies we tried to answer the question whether and to what extent the different types of fallacies that theoretically speaking are a violation of the argument scheme rule, are seen as unreasonable by ordinary language users. Of each of the three main types of argument schemes (i.e. symptomatic argumentation, causal argumentation and comparison argumentation) one or more misuses were investigated. In this paper the experimental results pertaining to the argumentum ad consequentiam, the argumentum ad populum, the slippery slope and the fallacy of the false analogy are discussed.


Mill’S On Liberty And Argumentation Theory, Maurice A. Finocchiaro Jun 2005

Mill’S On Liberty And Argumentation Theory, Maurice A. Finocchiaro

OSSA Conference Archive

Chapter 2 of Mill’s On Liberty is reconstructed as a complex argument for freedom of discussion; it consists of three subarguments, each possessing illative and dialectical components. The illative component is this: freedom of discussion is desirable because (1) it enables us to determine whether an opinion is true, whereas its denial amounts to an assumption of infallibility; (2) it improves our understanding and appreciation of the supporting reasons of true opinions, and our understanding and appreciation of their practical or emotional meaning; (3) it enables us to understand and appreciate every side of the truth, given that opinions ...


Epistemic Contextualism And The Context Of An Argument, G C. Goddu Jun 2005

Epistemic Contextualism And The Context Of An Argument, G C. Goddu

OSSA Conference Archive

Contextualists with regard to knowledge argue that the truth of the claim 'x knows that P' is contextually dependent. In doing so, they attempt to articulate the nature of the contextual dependence. Since part of making knowledge claims involves the adequate justification of beliefs, I shall explore whether any epistemic contextualist theories can be modified or adapted to provide an account of the context-dependence of justificatory strength for arguments. I shall conclude that the prospects are not promising.


A Matrix Model Of Argumentation, Alan Cirlin Jun 2005

A Matrix Model Of Argumentation, Alan Cirlin

OSSA Conference Archive

This paper presents a two-dimensional teaching model of argumentation that evolved over a number of years. It was originally developed out of Stephen Toulmin’s model and offers a ‘matrix approach’ to the analysis of complex rhetorical events. The two dimensions of the matrix involve the analysis of the sub-claims used to support the ultimate claim in a rhetorical artifact and the way in which those sub-claims are organized. This paper briefly presents the background, rationale, basic elements, and structure of the model. And while there is insufficient space to provide a full, detailed example, this paper will suggest some ...


Emotional Backing And The Feeling Of Deep Disagreement, Richard Friemann Jun 2005

Emotional Backing And The Feeling Of Deep Disagreement, Richard Friemann

OSSA Conference Archive

This paper discusses Toulmin’s (1964) concept of backing with respect to the emotional mode of arguing. Specifically, I examine an example from Fogelin (1985) where emotional backing justifies a warrant concerning when we should judge that a person is being pig-headed. While his treatment of this kind of argument can be supported by contemporary emotion science, it needs to be supplemented by therapeutic techniques whether or not our goal is to rationally resolve such arguments. This is shown through a comparison with an analysis of an emotional argument from Gilbert (1997). The introduction of psychotherapy into argumentation theory raises ...


Argument Use In Gendered Contexts, Miqqi Alicia Gilbert Jun 2005

Argument Use In Gendered Contexts, Miqqi Alicia Gilbert

OSSA Conference Archive

It has been accepted for some time within Communication Theory that there are identifiable differences in how men and women communicate. This acceptance obtains both within the academic world and even more so within the realm of folk Communication Theory. I argue that the gender-identified differences run along distinct poles. The first major pole concerns the objectives meant to be achieved by argument: is it deciding who is right? Or, what the issue really is? Or, how a disagreement can or should be resolved? The second major aspect concerns the communi­cative tools used in settling differences and understanding positions ...


Reductions Of The Already Reduced: The Neglect Of Qualifiers, Rebuttals, And Backing In Appropriations Of The ‘Toulmin Model’ In Contemporary Composition Pedagogy, David Flemming, Melvin Hall Jun 2005

Reductions Of The Already Reduced: The Neglect Of Qualifiers, Rebuttals, And Backing In Appropriations Of The ‘Toulmin Model’ In Contemporary Composition Pedagogy, David Flemming, Melvin Hall

OSSA Conference Archive

No abstract provided.


Argumentation In Students’ Academic Discourse, Kara Gilbert Jun 2005

Argumentation In Students’ Academic Discourse, Kara Gilbert

OSSA Conference Archive

A variety of theoretical and epistemological perspectives on the notion of argument has contributed towards the development of numerous text analysis systems in contemporary argumentation research, making the selection of an analytic model for the description and evaluation of arguments in natural language contexts a complex task for researchers. Not surprisingly, Western scholars have overwhelmingly relied on Anglo- and Euro-centric models of argumentation as normative references of argument structure and quality in a variety of research contexts, disregarding plurality of practice within socio-cultural contexts. I will discuss how the findings of my own research, in which I examine the rhetorical ...


Induction And Invention: The Toulmin Model Meets Critical Rhetoric, Satoru Aonuma Jun 2005

Induction And Invention: The Toulmin Model Meets Critical Rhetoric, Satoru Aonuma

OSSA Conference Archive

The aim of this paper is to (re)articulate the relationship between ‘critical rhetoric’ and Stephen Toulmin’s conception of practical reasoning. Among students of rhetoric, particularly those who work in communication departments in (US) American universities, the project of reason, once cherished as central to the 20th century Renaissance of argument, seems to have become outdated and irrelevant. With the recent ‘critical turn,’ reason was especially given a bad name in the field of rhetoric. Some rhetoricians have even joined reason’s Other, dissociating themselves from the project of reason as much as possible. The paper contends that the ...


Theoretical Construction And Argumentative Reality: An Analytic Model Of Critical Discussion And Conventionalised Types Of Argumentative Activity, Frans H. Van Eemeren, Peter Houtlosser Jun 2005

Theoretical Construction And Argumentative Reality: An Analytic Model Of Critical Discussion And Conventionalised Types Of Argumentative Activity, Frans H. Van Eemeren, Peter Houtlosser

OSSA Conference Archive

Van Eemeren and Houtlosser concentrate on the tension inherent in argumentative discourse between the pursuit of success and the maintenance of reasonableness. They elaborate on their earlier claim that this tension leads to ‘strategic manoeuvring’ that can be explained by making use of insights from dialectic and rhetoric. As a new step in their treatment of strategic manoeuvring they take account of the fact that the manoeuvring always takes place in one of the various argumentative ‘activity types’ that can be distinguished in argumentative practice. Unlike theoretical constructs such as a critical discussion and other ideal models, which are based ...