nach oben

Erschienen in:

2008 | OriginalPaper | Buchkapitel

8. Argument Diagramming: The Araucaria Project

verfasst von : Glenn Rowe, Chris Reed

Erschienen in: Knowledge Cartography

Verlag: Springer London

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

Formal arguments, such as those used in science, medicine and law to establish a conclusion by providing supporting evidence, are frequently represented by diagrams such as trees and graphs. We describe the software package Araucaria which allows textual arguments to be marked up and represented as standard, Toulmin or Wigmore diagrams. Since each of these diagramming techniques was devised for a particular domain or argumentation, we discuss some of the issues involved in translating between diagrams. The exercise of translating between different diagramming types illustrates that any one diagramming system often cannot capture all of the nuances inherent in an argument. Finally, we describe some areas, such as critical thinking courses in colleges and universities and the analysis of evidence in court cases, where Araucaria has been put to practical use.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Vorheriges Kapitel Scaffolding School Pupils’ Scientific Argumentation with Evidence-based Dialogue Maps

Nächstes Kapitel Mapping the Curriculum: How Concept Maps can Improve the Effectiveness of Course Development

Freeman, J. (1991) Dialectics and the Macrostructure of Argument, NY: Foris.CrossRef

Gilbert, M.A. (1997) Coalescent Argumentation. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Grennan, W. (1997) Informal Logic, Montreal: McGill Queens University Press.

Hansard (2004) UK House of Commons Debates for 16 Sept 2004: http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200304/cmhansrd/vo040916/debtext/40916-06.htm

Harrell, M. (2005) Using argument diagramming software in the classroom, Teaching Philosophy 28(2).

Hitchcock, D. (2003) Toulmin’s warrants, in: Proceedings of the 5th International Conference of Argumentation (ISSA 2002), SicSat.

Hurley, P. (2003) A Concise Introduction to Logic, Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

Johnson, R.H. (2000) Manifest Rationality: A Pragmatic Theory of Argument, Mahwah, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Katzav, J. and C. Reed (2004) On argumentation schemes and the natural classification of argument, Argumentation 18(4), 239–259.CrossRef

Katzav, J., C.A. Reed and G.W.A. Rowe (2004) Argument Research Corpus, in: B. Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk (ed) Practical Applications in Language and Computers (Proceedings of the 2003 Conference), Peter Lang, Frankfurt, pp. 229–239.

Kirschner, P., S. Buckingham Shum and C. Carr (2003) Visualizing Argumentation: Software Tools for Collaborative and Educational Sense-Making, Berlin Heidelberg London New York: Springer.CrossRef

Norman, T.J., D.V. Carbogim, E.C.W. Krabbe and D.N. Walton (2003) Argument and multi-agent systems, in: C. Reed and T. Norman (eds) Argumentation Machines: New Frontiers in Argument and Computation, Kluwer, pp. 15–54.

Parsons, T. (1996) What is argument? Journal of Philosophy 93.

Perelman C. and L. Olbrechts-Tyteca (1969) The New Rhetoric: A Treatise on Argumentation, Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.

Pollock (1995) Cognitive Carpentry, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Rahwan, I., P. Moraitis and C. Reed (2005) Argumentation in Multi-Agent Systems (Proceedings of ArgMAS2004), no. 3366 in Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, Springer.

Reed, C. and G. Rowe (2004) Araucaria: software for argument analysis, diagramming and representation, International Journal of AI Tools 13(4): 961–980.CrossRef

Reed, C. and G. Rowe (2006) Translating Toulmin diagrams: theory neutrality in argument representation, Argumentation 19(3): 267–286.CrossRef

Reed, C. and D. Walton (2005) Towards a formal and implemented model of argumentation schemes in agent communication, Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems 11(2): 172–188.CrossRef

Rowe, G. and C. Reed (2006) Translating Wigmore diagrams, in: P.E. Dunne and T.J.M. Bench-Capon (eds) Computational Models of Argument (Proceedings of COMMA 2006), Amsterdam: IOS Press, pp. 171–182.

Rowe, G., F. Macagno, C. Reed and D. Walton (2006) Araucaria as a tool for diagramming arguments in teaching and studying philosophy, Teaching Philosophy 29(2): 111–124.CrossRef

Tolchinsky, P., S. Modgil, U. Cortes and M. Sanchez-Marre (2006) Cbr and argument schemes for collaborative decision making, in: P. Dunne and T. Bench-Capon (eds) Computational Models of Argument (Proceedings of COMMA 2006), Amsterdam: IOS Press, pp. 171–182.

Toulmin, S. (1958) The Uses of Argument, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Twardy, C. (2004) Argument maps improve critical thinking, Teaching Philosophy 27, 95–116.CrossRef

van den Braak, S., H. van Oostendorp, H. Prakken and G. Vreeswijk (2006) A critical review of argument visualization tools: do users become better reasoners? in: Working Notes of the 6th Workshop of Computational Models of Natural Argument (CMNA 2006).

van Eemeren, F.H. (ed) (2004) Advances in Pragma-Dialectics, Amsterdam: Vale Press.

Walton, D. (1996) Argumentation Schemes for Presumptive Reasoning, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Walton, D. (2006) Fundamentals of Critical Argumentation, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Wells, S. and C. Reed (2005) A drosophila for computational dialectics, in: Proceedings of the International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems (AAMAS 2005).

Wigmore, J. (1913) The Principles of Judicial Proof, Boston: Little Brown & Company.

Willmott, S., G. Vreeswijk, M. South, C. Chesñevar, G. Simari, J. McGinnis, I. Rahwan and C. Reed (2006) Towards an argument interchange format for multiagent systems, in: N. Maudet, S. Parsons and I. Rahwan (eds) Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop on Argumentation in Multi-Agent Systems (ArgMAS 2006), Springer.

Wreen, M. (1998) A few remarks on the individuation of arguments, in: Proceedings of the 4th International Conference of Argumentation (ISSA 1998), SicSat.

Titel: Argument Diagramming: The Araucaria Project
verfasst von: Glenn Rowe
Chris Reed
Verlag: Springer London
Buch: Knowledge Cartography
Print ISBN: 978-1-84800-148-0

Electronic ISBN: 978-1-84800-149-7

Copyright-Jahr: 2008
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84800-149-7_8

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"