A Bayesian approach to informal argument fallacies

Synthese

Volumn 152, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 207-236

  Hahn, Ulrike ^a   Oaksford, Mike ^b  

^a CARDIFF UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33749439893     PISSN: 00397857     EISSN: 15730964     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11229-005-5233-2     Document Type: Article

References (66)

1. Alexy, R.: 1989, A Theory of Legal Argumentation, Clarendon Press, Oxford.
2. Bench-Capon, T. J. M.: 2003, 'Persuasion in Practical Argument Using Value-Based Argumentation Frameworks', Journal of Logic and Computation 13, 429-448.
3. Bowell, T. and Kemp, G.: 2002, Critical Thinking: A Concise Guide, Routledge, London.
4. Brown, H.: 1993, 'A Theory-Laden Observation can Test a Theory', British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 44, 555-559.
5. Brown, H.: 1994, 'Circular Justifications', PSA 1, 406-414.
6. Burg, W. van der: 1991, 'The Slippery Slope Argument', Ethics 42, 42.
7. Cherniak, C.: 1986, Minimal Rationality, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
8. Clark, K. L.: 1978, 'Negation as Failure', In H. Gallaire and J. Minker (eds.) Logic and Databases, Plenum Press, New York, pp. 293-322.
9. Copi, I. M. and Cohen, C.: 1990, Introduction to Logic (8th ed.), Macmillan Press, New York.
10. De Cornulier, B.: 1988, 'Knowing Whether, Knowing Who, and Epistemic Closure', in M. Meyer (ed.) Questions and Questioning, Walter de Gruyter, Berlin, pp. 182-192.
11. Earman, J.: 1992, Bayes or Bust? MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
12. Eemeren, F. H. van and Grootendorst, R.: 1984, Speech Acts in Argumentative Discussions. A Theoretical Model for the Analysis of Discussions Directed Towards Solving Conflicts of Opinion, De Gruyter, Berlin.
13. Eemeren, F. H. van and Grootendorst, R.: 1992, Argumentation, Communication, and Fallacies, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.
14. Eemeren, F. H. van and Grootendorst, R.: 2004, A Systematic Theory of Argumentation. The Pragma-Dialectical Approach, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
15. Fox, J.: 2003, 'Probability, Logic and the Cognitive Foundations of Rational Belief', Journal of Applied Logic 1, 197-224.
16. Fox, J. and Parsons, S.: 1998, 'Arguing about Beliefs and Actions', in A. Hunter and S. Parsons (eds.), Applications of Uncertainty Formalisms (Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence 1455), Springer Verlag, Berlin, pp. 266-302.
17. Gabbay, D.: 1996, Labelled Deduction Systems, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
18. Geiger, D. and Shenoy, P. P. (eds.) 1997, Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence: Proceedings of the Thirteenth Conference, Morgan Kaufman, San Francisco, CA.
19. Govier, T.: 1982, 'What's Wrong with Slippery Slope Arguments', Canadian Journal of Philosophy 12, 303-316.
20. Green, D. M. and Swets, J. A.: 1966, Signal Detection Theory and Psychophysics, Wiley, New York.
21. Hamblin, C. L.: 1970, Fallacies, Methuen, London.
22. Harman, G.: 1965, 'The Inference to the Best Explanation', Philosophical Review 64, 88-95.
23. Holtug, N.: 1993, 'Human gene therapy: Down the slippery slope', Bioethics 7, 402-419.
24. Howson, C.: 2003, 'Probability and logic', Journal of Applied Logic 1, 151-165.
25. Howson, C. and Urbach, P.: 1989, Scientific Reasoning: The Bayesian Approach, Open Court, La Salle, Illinois.
26. Ikuenobe, P.: 2004, 'On the Theoretical Unification and Nature of the Fallacies', Argumentation 18, 189-211.
27. Josephson, J. R. and Josephson, S. G.: 1994, Abductive Inference: Computation, Philosophy, Technology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
28. Kohlas, J.: 2003, Probabilistic Argumentation Systems: 'A New Way to Combine Logic with Probability', Journal of Applied Logic 1, 225-253.
29. Krause, P. and Clark, D.: 1993, Representing Uncertain Knowledge: An Artificial Intelligence Approach, Intellect Books, Oxford, UK.
30. Kuhn, D.: 1993, Connecting Scientific and Informal Reasoning, Merrill-Palmer.
31. Kyburg, Jr., H. E.: 2003, 'Are there degrees of belief ?', Journal of Applied Logic 1, 139-149.
32. Lode, E.: 1999, 'Slippery Slope Arguments and Legal Reasoning', California Law Review 87, 1469-1544.
33. McClelland, J. L. and Rumelhart, D.E.: 1981, An Interactive Activation Model of Context Effects in Letter Perception: Part 1. An Account of Basic Findings, Psychological Review 88, 375-407.
34. McClelland, J. L.: 1998, 'Connectionist Models and Bayesian Inference', in M. Oaksford and N. Chater (eds.) Rational Models of Cognition, Oxford University Press, Oxford. pp. 21-53.
35. McMeniman, L.: 1999, From Inquiry to Argument, Allyn & Bacon, Needham Heights, Mass.
36. Miller, D.: 1994, Critical Rationalism: A Restatement and a Defence, Open Court, La Salle, IL.
37. Moshman, D. and Geil, M.: 1998, 'Collaborative Reasoning: Evidence for Collective Rationality', Thinking and Reasoning 4, 231-248.
38. Oaksford, M. and Chater, N.: 1991, 'Against Logicist Cognitive Science', Mind & Language 6, 1-38.
39. Oaksford, M. and Hahn, U.: 2004, 'A Bayesian Approach to the Argument from Ignorance', Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology 58, 75-85.
40. Parsons, S.: 2000, Qualitative Methods for Reasoning Under Uncertainty, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
41. Pearl, J.: 1988, Probabilistic Reasoning in Intelligent Systems, Morgan Kaufman, San Mateo, CA.
42. Pearl, J.: 2000, Causality, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
43. Perelman, C. and Olbrechts-Tyteca, L.: 1969, The New Rhetoric: A Treatise on Argumentation, University of Notre Dame Press, Notre Dame, Indiana.
44. Pollock, J. L.: 2001, 'Defeasible Reasoning with Variable Degrees of Justification', Artificial Intelligence 133, 233-282.
45. Powers, L.: 1995, 'The One Fallacy Theory', Informal Logic 17, 303-314.
46. Prakken, H. and Vreeswijk, G. A. W.: 2002, 'Logics for Defeasible Argumentation', in D. M. Gabbay and F. Guenthner (eds.), Handbook of Philosophical Logic, 2nd edn., Vol. 4, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht/Boston/London. pp. 219-318.
47. Prakken, H., Walton, D. and Reed, C.: 2005, 'Dialogues about the Burden of Proof', in Proceeding of the Tenth Internal Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, Bologna, Italy, June, Association for Computing Machinery, New York, pp. 115-124
48. Ramsey, F. P.: 1931, The Foundations of Mathematics and Other Logical Essays, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London.
49. Reiter, R.: 1980, 'A Logic for Default Reasoning', Artificial Intelligence 13, 81-132.
50. Reiter, R.: 1985, 'On Reasoning by Default', in R. Brachman, and H. Levesque (eds.), Readings in Knowledge Representation, Morgan Kaufman, Los Altos, CA, pp. 401-410.
51. Savage, L. J.: 1954, The Foundations of Statistics, John Wiley, New York.
52. Schauer, F.: 1985, 'Slippery Slopes', Harvard Law Review 99, 361-383.
53. Shogenji, T.: 2000, 'Self-dependent Justification Without Circularity', British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 51, 287-298.
54. Sober, E.: 2002, 'Bayesianism: Its Scope and Limits', in R. Swinburne (ed.), Bayes Theorem, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
55. Surowiecki, J.: 2004, The Wisdom of Crowds, Doubleday, New York.
56. Volokh, E.: 2003, 'The Mechanisms of the Slippery Slope', Harvard Law Review 116, 1026-1137.
57. Walton, D. N.: 1985, 'Are Circular Arguments Necessarily Vicious?', American Philosophical Quarterly 22, 263-274.
58. Walton, D. N.: 1989, Informal Logic, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
59. Walton, D. N.: 1991, Begging the Question: Circular Reasoning as a Tactic in Argumentation, Greenwood Press, New York.
60. Walton, D. N.: 1992, 'Nonfallacious Arguments from Ignorance', American Philosophical Quarterly 29, 381-387.
61. Walton, D. N.: 1992b, Slippery Slope Arguments, Oxford University Press.
62. Walton, D.N.: 1995, A Pragmatic Theory of Fallacy, The University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa/London.
63. Walton, D. N.: 1996, Arguments from Ignorance, Pennsylvania State University Press, Philadelphia, PA.
64. Walton, D.N.: 1998, The New Dialectic: Conversational Contexts of Argument, University of Toronto Press, Toronto.
65. Williams, B.: 1985, 'Which Slopes are Slippery?', in M. Lockwood (ed.), Moral Dilemmas in Modern Medicine, Oxford University Press, Oxford. (pp. 126-137)
66. Woods, J., Irvine, A. and Walton, D. N.: 2004, Argument: Critical Thinking, Logic and the Fallacies, Revised edn., Prentice Hall, Toronto.