A normative framework for argument quality: argumentation schemes with a Bayesian foundation

Hahn, Ulrike and Hornikx, J. (2016) A normative framework for argument quality: argumentation schemes with a Bayesian foundation. Synthese 193 (6), pp. 1833-1873. ISSN 0039-7857.

Full text not available from this repository.

Official URL: http://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-015-0815-0

Abstract

In this paper, it is argued that the most fruitful approach to developing normative models of argument quality is one that combines the argumentation scheme approach with Bayesian argumentation. Three sample argumentation schemes from the literature are discussed: the argument from sign, the argument from expert opinion, and the appeal to popular opinion. Limitations of the scheme-based treatment of these argument forms are identified and it is shown how a Bayesian perspective may help to overcome these. At the same time, the contributions of the standard scheme-based approach are highlighted, and it is argued that only a combination of the insights of different traditions will yield a complete normative theory of argument quality.

Metadata

Item Type:	Article
Keyword(s) / Subject(s):	Argumentation, Rationality, Testimony, Evidence, Inference
School:	Birkbeck Schools and Departments > School of Science > Psychological Sciences
Research Centre:	Birkbeck Knowledge Lab
Depositing User:	Administrator
Date Deposited:	15 Jun 2016 12:51
Last Modified:	02 Dec 2016 13:39
URI:	http://eprints.bbk.ac.uk/id/eprint/15562

Statistics

Archive Staff Only (login required)

Edit/View Item