A Network of Argumentation Schemes and Critical Questions

IF 0.9 3区哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY

Informal Logic Pub Date : 2022-12-13 DOI:10.22329/il.v42i4.6877

Sung-Jun Pyon, Yong-Sok Ri

引用次数: 0

Abstract

In this paper, we devise a network that consists of argumentation schemes and critical questions that participants in debates can use to easily construct arguments that attack or support former arguments. As a prototype, we build a potential network of argumentation schemes and critical questions with a practical reasoning scheme at its center. The usefulness of a NASCQ in constructing and reconstructing complex arguments and in formal argumentation is also explored along with argumentation more broadly.

查看原文本刊更多论文

论证方案和关键问题网络

在本文中，我们设计了一个由论证方案和关键问题组成的网络，辩论的参与者可以使用它来轻松构建攻击或支持先前论点的论点。作为原型，我们构建了一个潜在的论证方案和关键问题网络，其中心是一个实用的推理方案。NASCQ在构建和重构复杂论证和正式论证中的作用也随着论证的广泛进行了探讨。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Informal Logic PHILOSOPHY-

CiteScore

1.50

自引率

0.00%

发文量

审稿时长

12 weeks

期刊介绍： Informal Logic publishes articles that advance the dialectic in reasoning and argumentation theory and practice. Primary criteria for the acceptance of articles with a theoretical focus or interest are: (1) the article advances the dialectic or constitutes an interesting comment on it: it presents a cogent argument, objection, interpretation or position that is an advance in relation to the background of issues and controversies on the topic; or it casts the issue addressed in a new and worthwhile light; and (2) the article makes explicit reference to the pertinent literature on its topic, and it discharges the burden of proof imposed by that scholarship. Primary criteria for acceptance of articles devoted to the teaching of informal logic, critical thinking or argumentation include: originality; utility; timeliness; and evidence of the effectiveness of the methods, materials, technologies, etc., proposed. The standard criteria for scholarly publication—topical fit with the subjects covered in the journal; adequacy of coverage to the issue addressed; clarity, organization and literateness of the prose; conceptual clarity and cogency of argumentation—apply ceteris paribus to the selection of all articles, notes and reviews.