The Carneades model of argument invention

Pragmatics and Cognition

Volumn 20, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 1-31

  Walton, Douglas ^a   Gordon, Thomas F ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WINDSOR   (Canada)

^b FRAUNHOFER FOKUS   (Germany)

Author keywords

Argument construction; Argument visualization; Argumentation schemes; Artificial intelligence; Finding an argument; Proof standards; Rhetorical argumentation

Indexed keywords

EID: 84862107896     PISSN: 09290907     EISSN: 15699943     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1075/pc.20.1.01wal     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Aristotle. 1937. The Art of Rhetoric. J. Henry Freese (trans). Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
2. Aristotle. 1939. Topics. E.S. Forster (trans). Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
3. Ballnat, S. and Gordon, T.F. 2010. "Goal selection in argumentation processes". In P. Baroni, F. Cerutti, M. Giacomin, and G. R. Simari (eds), Computational Models of Argument: Proceedings of COMMA 2010. Amsterdam: IOS Press, 51-62.
4. Bench-Capon, T.J.M., Doutre, S., and Dunne, P.E. 2007. "Audiences in argumentation frameworks". Artificial Intelligence 171(1): 42-71. (Pubitemid 46073928)
5. Bench-Capon, T.J.M. and Sartor, G. 2003. "A model of legal reasoning with cases incorporating theories and values". Artificial Intelligence 150(1-2): 97-143.
6. Bird, O. 1962. "The tradition of the Logical Topics: Aristotle to Ockham". Journal of the History of Ideas 23(3): 307-323.
7. Blair J.H. and Johnson, R.H. 1987. "Argumentation as dialectical". Argumentation 1(1): 41-56.
8. Buckingham Shum, S.J., MacLean, A., Bellotti, V.M.E., and Hammond, N.V. 1997. "Graphical argumentation and design cognition". Human-Computer Interaction 12(3): 267-300. (Pubitemid 127714561)
9. Freeman, J.B. 1991. Dialectics and the Macrostructure of Arguments. Berlin: Foris.
10. Freeman, J.B. 1995. "The appeal to popularity and presumption by common knowledge". In H.V. Hansen and R.C. Pinto (eds), Fallacies: Classical and Contemporary Readings. University Park, PA: Penn State Press, 263-273.
11. Giles. J. 2005. "Internet encyclopaedias go head to head". Nature 438: 900-901. doi: 10.1038/438900a; [Published online 14 December 2005]
12. Gordon, T.F. 2005. "A computational model of argument for legal reasoning support systems". In P.E. Dunne and T.J.M Bench-Capon, Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence and Law, IAAIL Workshop Series. Nijmegen: Wolf Legal Publishers, 53-64.
13. Gordon, T.F. 2010. "The Carneades argumentation support system". In C. Reed and C.W. Tindale (eds), Dialectics, Dialogue and Argumentation. London: College Publications, 145-146.
14. Gordon, T.F. 2011. "Analyzing open source license compatibility issues with Carneades". Proceedings of the Thirteenth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law (ICAIL- 2011). New York: ACM Press, 50-55.
15. Gordon T.F. and Walton, D. 2006. "The Carneades argumentation framework". In P.E. Dunne and T.J.M. Bench-Capon (eds), Computational Models of Argument: Proceedings of COMMA 2006. Amsterdam: IOS Press, 195-207.
16. Gordon, T.F., Prakken, H., and Walton, D. 2007. "The Carneades model of argument and burden of proof ". Artificial Intelligence 171: 875-896. (Pubitemid 47285070)
17. Gordon, T.F. and Walton, D. 2009. "Proof burdens and standards". In . I. Rahwan and G. Simari (eds), Argumentation and Artificial Intelligence. Berlin: Springer, 239-260.
18. Grennan, W. 1997. Informal Logic. Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press.
19. Hamblin, C.L. 1971. "Mathematical models of dialogue". Theoria 37: 130-155.
20. Hastings, A.C. 1963. A Reformulation of the Modes of Reasoning in Argumentation. Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation. Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois.
21. Hohmann, H. 1989. "The dynamics of stasis: Classical rhetorical theory and modern legal argumentation". American Journal of Jurisprudence 34: 171-197.
22. Hohmann, H. 2000. "Rhetoric and dialectic: Some historical and legal perspectives". Argumentation 14: 223-234.
23. Kennedy, G. 1963. The Art of Persuasion in Greece. London: Routledge.
24. Kienpointner, M. 1992. Alltagslogik: Struktur und Funktion von Argumentationsmustern, Stuttgart: Fromman-Holzboog.
25. Kienpointner, M. 1997. "On the art of finding arguments: What ancient and modern masters of invention have to tell us about the Ars Inveniendi". Argumentation 11: 225-236.
26. Leff, M. 1996. "Commonplaces and argumentation in Cicero and Quintilian". Argumentation 10: 445-452.
27. Leff, M. 1983. "The topics of argumentative invention in latin rhetorical theory from Cicero to Boethius". Rhetorica 1: 23-44.
28. Nute, D. 1994. "Defeasible logic". In Handbook of Logic in Artificial Intelligence and Logic Programming, volume 3: Nonmonotonic Reasoning and Uncertain Reasoning. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 353-395.
29. Perelman, C. and Olbrechts-Tyteca, L. 1969. The New Rhetoric: A Treatise on Argumentation. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.
30. Reed, C. and Rowe, G. 2005. Araucaria, Version 3.1. Available free at http://www.computing.dundee.ac.uk/staff/creed/araucaria/.
31. Scheuer, O., Loll, F., Pinkwart, N., and McLaren, B.M. 2010. "Computer-supported argumentation: A review of the state of the art". Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning 5 (1): 43-102.
32. Tindale, C.W. 1990. "Audiences and acceptable premises: Epistemic and logical conditions". In van Eemeren et al (eds), Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Argumentation. Amsterdam: SICSAT, 288-295.
33. Tindale, C.W. 1999. Acts of Arguing: A Rhetorical Model of Argument. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
34. Walton, D. 2010. "A dialogue model of belief ". Argument and Computation 1: 23-46.
35. Walton D. and Gordon, T.F. 2005. "Critical questions in computational models of legal argument". In P.E Dunne, and T.J.M Bench-Capon (eds), 103-111.
36. Walton, D., Reed, C., and Macagno, F. 2008. Argumentation Schemes. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.