web site hit counter Argumentation Schemes for Presumptive Reasoning - Ebooks PDF Online
Hot Best Seller

Argumentation Schemes for Presumptive Reasoning

Availability: Ready to download

Recent concerns with the evaluation of argumentation in informal logic and speech communication center around nondemonstrative arguments that lead to tentative or defeasible conclusions based on a balance of considerations. Such arguments do not appear to have structures of the kind traditionally identified with deductive and inductive reasoning, but are extremely common a Recent concerns with the evaluation of argumentation in informal logic and speech communication center around nondemonstrative arguments that lead to tentative or defeasible conclusions based on a balance of considerations. Such arguments do not appear to have structures of the kind traditionally identified with deductive and inductive reasoning, but are extremely common and are often called "plausible" or "presumptive," meaning that they are only provisionally acceptable even when they are correct. How is one to judge, by some clearly defined standard, whether such arguments are correct or not in a given instance? The answer lies in what are called argumentation schemes -- forms of argument (structures of inference) that enable one to identify and evaluate common types of argumentation in everyday discourse. This book identifies 25 argumentation schemes for presumptive reasoning and matches a set of critical questions to each. These two elements -- the scheme and the questions -- are then used to evaluate a given argument in a particular case in relation to a context of dialogue in which the argument occurred. In recent writings on argumentation, there is a good deal of stress placed on how important argumentation schemes are in any attempt to evaluate common arguments in everyday reasoning as correct or fallacious, acceptable or questionable. However, the problem is that the literature thus far has not produced a precise and user-friendly enough analysis of the structures of the argumentation schemes themselves, nor have any of the documented accounts been as helpful, accessible, or systematic as they could be, especially in relation to presumptive reasoning. This book solves the problem by presenting the most common presumptive schemes in an orderly and clear way that makes them explicit and useful as precisely defined structures. As such, it will be an indispensable tool for researchers, students, and teachers in the areas of critical thinking, argumentation, speech communication, informal logic, and discourse analysis.


Compare

Recent concerns with the evaluation of argumentation in informal logic and speech communication center around nondemonstrative arguments that lead to tentative or defeasible conclusions based on a balance of considerations. Such arguments do not appear to have structures of the kind traditionally identified with deductive and inductive reasoning, but are extremely common a Recent concerns with the evaluation of argumentation in informal logic and speech communication center around nondemonstrative arguments that lead to tentative or defeasible conclusions based on a balance of considerations. Such arguments do not appear to have structures of the kind traditionally identified with deductive and inductive reasoning, but are extremely common and are often called "plausible" or "presumptive," meaning that they are only provisionally acceptable even when they are correct. How is one to judge, by some clearly defined standard, whether such arguments are correct or not in a given instance? The answer lies in what are called argumentation schemes -- forms of argument (structures of inference) that enable one to identify and evaluate common types of argumentation in everyday discourse. This book identifies 25 argumentation schemes for presumptive reasoning and matches a set of critical questions to each. These two elements -- the scheme and the questions -- are then used to evaluate a given argument in a particular case in relation to a context of dialogue in which the argument occurred. In recent writings on argumentation, there is a good deal of stress placed on how important argumentation schemes are in any attempt to evaluate common arguments in everyday reasoning as correct or fallacious, acceptable or questionable. However, the problem is that the literature thus far has not produced a precise and user-friendly enough analysis of the structures of the argumentation schemes themselves, nor have any of the documented accounts been as helpful, accessible, or systematic as they could be, especially in relation to presumptive reasoning. This book solves the problem by presenting the most common presumptive schemes in an orderly and clear way that makes them explicit and useful as precisely defined structures. As such, it will be an indispensable tool for researchers, students, and teachers in the areas of critical thinking, argumentation, speech communication, informal logic, and discourse analysis.

44 review for Argumentation Schemes for Presumptive Reasoning

  1. 5 out of 5

    Kathryn Marie

    I find this book fascinating, and not so much because I'm a total believer in what Walton is doing here, his systematic approach to argumentation schemes, but more because I'm interested in argumentation all around. For now, I don't think argumentation really works in a such a prescriptive way, but I still think this is a valuable source to expand my growing understanding of argumentation and what others think of argumentation. I find this book fascinating, and not so much because I'm a total believer in what Walton is doing here, his systematic approach to argumentation schemes, but more because I'm interested in argumentation all around. For now, I don't think argumentation really works in a such a prescriptive way, but I still think this is a valuable source to expand my growing understanding of argumentation and what others think of argumentation.

  2. 4 out of 5

    Malik

  3. 4 out of 5

    Stephane

  4. 4 out of 5

    Oliver Laas

  5. 4 out of 5

    Deniz

  6. 4 out of 5

    Nick

  7. 4 out of 5

    Rob

  8. 5 out of 5

    Ben

  9. 4 out of 5

    Charlie

  10. 5 out of 5

    Martha

  11. 5 out of 5

    Pierre

  12. 4 out of 5

    Frank Prosl

  13. 4 out of 5

    Jonah Williams

  14. 5 out of 5

    Micheal Gumbert

  15. 4 out of 5

    Alex Burns

  16. 4 out of 5

    Lee Randolph

  17. 4 out of 5

    Soryah Hollasie Mottley

  18. 4 out of 5

    Stephen

  19. 5 out of 5

    Szymon Makula

  20. 4 out of 5

    J. Miles

  21. 5 out of 5

    Robert

  22. 5 out of 5

    Stefan Detrez

  23. 4 out of 5

    John

  24. 5 out of 5

    David Scarratt

  25. 5 out of 5

    Stephen

  26. 4 out of 5

    Nick

  27. 5 out of 5

    Manuel Bautista

  28. 4 out of 5

    Sebastian

  29. 5 out of 5

    Benjamin Johnson

  30. 5 out of 5

    Anna

  31. 4 out of 5

    Marcelo

  32. 5 out of 5

    Hertzel Karbasi

  33. 5 out of 5

    Maughn Gregory

  34. 5 out of 5

    David Waldock

  35. 5 out of 5

    Nazli A.

  36. 5 out of 5

    Pekka

  37. 4 out of 5

    Dave

  38. 4 out of 5

    Ruben

  39. 4 out of 5

    Zoe

  40. 5 out of 5

    Josh

  41. 5 out of 5

    Pierre

  42. 4 out of 5

    Tim McIntosh

  43. 4 out of 5

    Malik

  44. 4 out of 5

    Neva Boynukalın

Add a review

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Loading...
We use cookies to give you the best online experience. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy.