Walton's Argumentation Schemes for Presumptive Reasoning: A Critique and Development

The aim of the paper is to advance the theory of argument or inference schemes by suggesting answers to questions raised by Walton's Argumentation Schemes for Presumptive Reasoning (1996), specifically on: the relation between argument and reasoning; distinguishing deductive from presumptive schemes, the origin of schemes and the probative force of their use; and the motivation and justification for their associated critical questions.     

Argumentation Schemes in Persuasive Brochures

Many public information documents attempt to persuade the recipients that they should engage in or refrain from specific behaviour. This is based on the assumption that the recipient will decide about his or her behaviour on the basis of the information given and a rational evaluation of the pros and cons. An analysis of 20 public information brochures shows that the argumentation in persuasive brochures is often not marked as such. Argumentation is presented as factual information, and in many instances the task of making argumentational links and drawing conclusions is left to the reader. However, since the information offered does follow familiar argumentational schemes, readers can, in principle, reconstruct the argument. All the brochures make use of pragmatic argumentation (argumentation from consequences),i. e.,they formulate at least certain benefits of the desirable behaviour or disadvantages of the undesirable behaviour. In addition, they make regular use of argumentation from cause to effect and argumentation from example. Argumentation from rules and argumentation from authority are less frequently used. This empirical analysis of the use of argumentation schemes is a solid base for interesting and rich hypotheses about the cognitive processing of persuasive brochures. Central processing requires the reader to be able to reconstruct argumentation from informational texts and to identify and evaluate various types of argumentation.     

The Oldest Typology of Argumentation Schemes

The Rhetoric to Alexander (about 340 B.C.) contains a list of proofs (pisteis) and other types of argumentation which may be seen as the oldest surviving typology of argumentation schemes (avant la lettre). In the present article this typology is derived and compared with modern proposals. The conclusion is that the oldest typology is surprisingly similar to the most recent classifications.     

The Burden of Proof and Its Role in Argumentation

The notion of “the burden of proof” plays an important role in real-world argumentation contexts, in particular in law. It has also been given a central role in normative accounts of argumentation, and has been used to explain a range of classic argumentation fallacies. We argue that in law the goal is to make practical decisions whereas in critical discussion the goal is frequently simply to increase or decrease degree of belief in a proposition. In the latter case, it is not necessarily important whether that degree of belief exceeds a particular threshold (e.g., ‘reasonable doubt’). We explore the consequences of this distinction for the role that the “burden of proof” has played in argumentation and in theories of fallacy.     

一个新的测量过程框架——对引入认知加工模型的再思考

从认知任务分析出发的测验设计,核心在于从认知加工的角度对项目底层作答机制作出解释。其中,能够刻画任务难度的模型最有可能与心理计量模型相结合。因而,具备成熟难度法则的各种小型理论或通用理论可以进入测量过程,实现从纯粹误差结构控制的测量到内容导引的测量的转变。在这样一个框架之下,理论对任务上作答过程的理解是否恰当,刺激特性变量与任务难度关系的揭示(即难度法则)是否准确,可以在测量的过程中进行证伪。项目反应理论还未及很好回答的效度问题,可望在这一拓展的框架中获得圆满解决。本文为新的测量过程框架提供了一个示意图。     

A Survey of 25 Years of Research on Legal Argumentation

This essay discusses the developments and trends of research in legalargumentation of the last 25 years. The essay starts with a survey of thevarious approaches which can be distinguished: the logical approach, therhetorical approach, and the dialogical approach. Then it identifies varioustopics in the research, which constitute the various components of aresearch programme of legal argumentation: the philosophical component, thetheoretical component, the reconstruction component, the empiricalcomponent, and the practical component. It concludes with a discussion ofthe main trends in the research of the last 25 years.     

Reconstructing Complex Analogy Argumentation in Judicial Decisions: A Pragma-Dialectical Perspective

Empirical research in the field of legal interpretation shows that, in many cases, analogy argumentation is complex rather than simple. Traditional analytical approaches to analogy argumentation do not explore that complexity. In most cases analogy argumentation is reconstructed as a simple form of argumentation that consists of two premises and a conclusion. This article focuses on the question of how to analyze and evaluate complex analogy argumentation. It is shown how the pragma-dialectical approach provides clues for analyzing complex analogy argumentation and how the criteria for evaluating analogy argumentation can be used to reconstruct these types of complex analogy argumentation in Dutch case law. The critical questions in the argumentation scheme do not only serve as a tool for analyzing arguments justifying analogy argumentation, but are also helpful in analyzing arguments against a specific analogy argumentation.     

组织创新的研究进展

通过整合应用心理和技术创新管理对组织创新的研究,本文综述了组织创新的维度与测量、组织创新的影响因素、组织创新过程和组织创新的动力等方面的研究进展。     

Strategic Maneuvering in Direct to Consumer Drug Advertising: A Study in Argumentation Theory and New Institutional Theory

New Institutional Theory is used to explain the context for argumentation in modern practice. The illustration of Direct to Consumer Drug advertising is deployed to show how communicative argument between a doctor and patient is influenced by force exogenous to the practice of medicine. The essay shows how strategic maneuvering shifts the burden of proof within institutional relations.     

A Concept Divided: Ralph Johnson's Definition of Argument

Ralph Johnson's Manifest Rationality (2000) is a major contribution to the field of informal logic, but the concept of argument that is central to its project suffers from a tension between the components that comprise it. This paper explores and addresses that tension by examining the implications of each of five aspects of the definition of argument.     

A Pragma-Dialectical Approach of the Analysis and Evaluation of Pragmatic Argumentation in a Legal Context

This paper answers the question how pragmatic argumentation which occurs in a legal context, can be analyzed and evaluated adequately. First, the author surveys various ideas taken from argumentation theory and legal theory on the analysis and evaluation of pragmatic argumentation. Then, on the basis of these ideas, she develops a pragma-dialectical instrument for analyzing and evaluating pragmatic argumentation in a legal context. Finally she demonstrates how this instrument can be used by giving an exemplary analysis and evaluation of pragmatic argumentation in a decision of the Dutch Supreme Court.     

Kant on Construction,Apriority, and the Moral Relevance of Universalization

This paper introduces a referential reading of Kant’s practical project, according to which maxims are made morally permissible by their correspondence to objects, though not the ontic objects of Kant’s theoretical project but deontic objects (what ought to be). It illustrates this model by showing how the content of the Formula of Universal Law might be determined by what our capacity of practical reason can stand in a referential relation to, rather than by facts about what kind of beings we are (viz., uncaused causes). This solves the neglected puzzle of why there are passages in Kant’s works suggesting robust analogies between mathematics and ethics, since to universalize a maxim is to test a priori whether a practical object with that particular content can be constructed. An apparent problem with this hypothesis is that the medium of practical sensibility (feeling) does not play a role analogous to the medium of theoretical sensibility (intuition). In response I distinguish two separate Kantian accounts of mathematical apriority. The thesis that maxim universalization is a species of construction, and thus a priori, turns out to be consistent with the account of apriority that informs Kant’s understanding of actual mathematical practice.     

Encroachments on State Sovereignty: The Argumentation Strategies of the George W. Bush Administration

As the world has increasingly embraced globalization, temptations to encroach on traditional boundaries of state sovereignty for reasons of self-interest mount. Argumentation studies provide an important lens for examining the public discourse used to justify such moves. This essay examines the Bush administration’s strategic use of the definitional processes of association and dissociation to build its public case for regime change in Afghanistan. After exploring how the Bush administration’s early rhetoric after 9/11 failed to actually provide the Taliban a choice to remain in power, the essay reveals three combinations of the terrorism/state relationship that functioned as an argument by definition to gain support for the US campaign to overthrow the regime.     

一个新的中医研究范式:从非线性动力学的角度解读中医

西方对中医的研究多是利用随机控制试验来检验其疗效。通过讨论,认为这类研究有其局限性。同时探讨一种新的研究范式,即非线性动力学理论。认为这一理论能够提供理论依据来设计适合中医特征的临床试验,并可望得出为西方医学界所接受的研究结果。     

董仲舒"元"概念新解

关于董仲舒哲学体系中“元”的概念,先贤及时贤有不同的理解.元有本原之义,但不能理解为宇宙本原或者元气,也不能简单地理解为时间概念的开始.元具有开始、开端的意思,但如果仅仅停留在开始、开端这一点上,就丧失了董仲舒元哲学的本来含义,而这一点恰恰被学者所忽略.元是存在于天地之前的一种本原性的秩序,它强调“始”、“微”、“正”,强调君主在天人体系中的地位和作用,重视道德动机.元囊括了整个天人体系,天人体系的本原是元,元同时又涵盖了一切秩序.     

教育本质新探

教育不仅是社会文化传承的活动,而且是一种唤醒人的生命意识、启迪人的精神世界,建构人的生存方式,以实现人的价值生命(人生价值)的特殊活动。人的"生存方式"就是人之生活和实践所表现出来的一切样态,是促进教育本身不断生长的元点。正走向"创建和建构生活"。     

一种新的智力观--塞西的智力生物生态学模型述评

美国心理学教授塞西在对传统智力心理测量学理论批评的基础上于1990年提出了信息加工取向的智力的生物生态学模型。这一模型主要有四个基本假设,即智力是一个多种资源系统;生物潜能与环境力量的相互作用;适宜的“最近过程”是智力发展的“引擎”;把“动机”整合到智力发展中。塞西智力的生物生态学模型为我们揭示人的智力的本质提供了一个新的视角。