Funkcje współczesnej teorii argumentacji

• Autorzy: Skulska J. K.

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.5604/18969380.1159242

Warianty tytułu

EN

Features theory of argumentation

• Języki publikacji: PL

Abstrakty

EN

This text is a critical review of basic concepts related to the theory of argumentation, and shows, by using some examples, the place of diagrams of arguments in the modern theory of argumentation. At the same time they are accommodated in the presentation of the basic tools of argument, such as argumentation diagrams, which are an integral part of research into the argument. Moreover, also brings out software analysis tool supporting argument, called Araucaria. In this critical review I refer to a brief review of the literature, including the works by Hamblin (1970), Johnson and Blair (1987), Walton, Reed and Macagno, allowing you to show7 the theory of argumentation in a broader context and its evaluation is essential in the study of the modern theory of argumentation. Referring to the canon of literature on research on patterns of reasoning (Hastings, Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca, van Emeren and Grootendorst, Kienpointner and Walton) trying to get the essential characteristics of precarious (called defeasible) reasoning. The basis for the model year and characterization of patterns of argument will be a proposal made in research D. Waltona.

Słowa kluczowe

PL

identyfikacja; analiza; ewaluacja; inwencja; diagramy argumentacji; schematy argumantacyjne

EN

identification; analysis; evaluation; invention; diagrams of arguments; defeasible reasoning; argumentation schemes

• Wydawca: Wojskowa Akademia Techniczna im. Jarosława Dąbrowskiego
• Czasopismo: Nowoczesne Systemy Zarządzania
• Rocznik: 2012
• Tom: T. 7, nr 1
• Strony: 249--265
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 42 poz., rys.

Twórcy

autor

Skulska J. K.

• Wojskowa Akademia Techniczna, Wydział Cybernetyki

Bibliografia

• [1] Arystoteles, Retoryka, [w:] Retoryka. Retoryka dla Aleksandra. Poetyka, tłum. Henryk Podbielski, PWN, Warszawka 2004.
• [2] Beardsley M., Practical Logic, Prentice-Hall, New7 York 1950.
• [3] Budzyńska K., Nowacki A., Skulska J., Argumenty, diagramy i Araucaria-PL, „Forum Artis Rhetoricae”, nr 1-2/2010.
• [4] Budzyńska K., Wizualna reprezentacja struktury kontrargumentacji, [w:] M. Załęska (red.), Retoryka krytyki w dyskursie akademickim: konflikty, polemiki, kontrowersje, Wyd. UW, Warszawa 2011.
• [5] Carbogim D., Robertson D. and Lee J., Argument-based Applications to Knowledge Engineering, „Knowledge Engineering Review” vol. 15 (2)/2000.
• [6] Hamblin Ch., Fallacies, Methuen, London 1970.
• [7] Krabbe E„ Nothing But Objections, Reason Reclaimed, oraz Hansen H.V., Pinto R.C., Newport News, Vale Press, Virginia 2007.
• [8] Fox J., Das S., Subrata, Safe and Sound: Artificial Intelligence in Hazardous Appications, Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, Cambridge 2000.
• [9] Freeman J., Dialectics and the Macrostructure of Arguments, Foris, Berlin 1991.
• [10] Grennan W., Informal Logic, McGill-Queens U. Press, 1997.
• [11] Hamblin Ch., Fallacies, Methuen, London 1970.
• [12] Hastings A., A Reformulation of the Modes of Reasoning in Argumentation, Ph.D. Dissertation, Northwestern University, Evanston, III, 1963.
• [13] Hastings A.C., A Reformulation of the Modes of Reasoning in Argumentation, Ph.D. Dissertation, Northwestern University, Evanston, III, 1963.
• [14] http://debategraph.org/), Rationale
• [15] http://rationale.austhink.com/), czy TruthMapping \
• [16] http://sourceforge.net/projects/argumentative/), Debategraph
• [17] http://truthmapping.com/).}
• [18] http://www.argunet.org/debates/), Argumentative
• [19] http://www. platforma.org/pl/aktualnosci/newsy/art80,-tusk-kaczynski-zapis-debaty. html z dn. 17.04.2010.
• [20] Johnson R.H., Blair T., Logical Self-Defence, Toronto 1977.
• [21] Katzav J., Reed Ch., On argumentation schemes and the natural classification of arguments, „Argumentation”, vol. 18(2)/2004.
• [22] Kienpointer M., Alltagslogik: Struktur ind Funktion von Argumentationsmustern, Fromman-Holzboog, Stuttgart 1992.
• [23] Perelman Ch., Olbrechts-Tyteca L., The New Rhetoric, Notre Damę Press, 1969.
• [24] Perelman H., Olbrechts-Tyteca L., Traite de Yargumentation - la nouvelle rhétorique, P.U.F., Paris 1958.
• [25] Pollock J., Cognitive Carpentry, Cambridge, MIT Press 1995.
• [26] Pollock J., Defeasible reasoning with variable degrees of justification, Artificial Intelligence, 2002.
• [27] Pollock J., Cognitive Carpentry, MIT Press, Cambridge 1995.
• [28] Prakken H„ Vreeswijk G., Logicsfor Defeasible Argumentation, Handbook of Philosophical Logic, tom 4, wyd. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht 2002.
• [28] Rahwan I., Simari G. (ed.), Argumentation Theory: A Very Short Introduction, Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence, Springer, Berlin 2009.
• [29] Scriven M., Reasoning, Point Reyes: Edgepress, 1976.
• [30] Szymanek K., Sztuka argumentacji. Słownik terminologiczny, PWN, Warszawa 2004.
• [31] Szymanek K., Wieczorek K., Wójcik A., Sztuka argumentacji. Ćwiczenia w badaniu argumentów, PWN, Warszawa 2005.
• [32] Tokarz M., Argumentacja, perswazja, manipulacja. Wykłady w teorii komunikacji, GWP, Gdański 2006.
• [33] Toulmin S., The Uses of Argument, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 1958.
• [34] Van Eemeren F.H., Grootendorst R„ A systematic theory of argumentation. The pragma-dialected approach, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 2004.
• [35] Van Eemeren F.H., Grootendorst R., Snoeck Henkemans E, et al, F undamentals of Argumentation Theory. A Handbook of Historical Backgrounds and Contemporary Developments, Mahwah, Erlbaum, New York 1996.
• [36] van Eemeren F.H.,Grootendorst R„ Speech Acts in Argumentative Discussions, Foris, Dordrechts 1984.
• [37] Van Eemeren F.H., Grootendorst R., Argumentation, Communication, and Fallacies: a Pragma-Dialectical Perspective, Hillsdale, Lawrence Erlbaum, New York 1992.
• [38] Walton D., Argumentation Schemes for Presumptive Reasoning, LEA, New York 1996.
• [39] Walton D., Argumentation Theory: A Very Short Introduction, Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence, ed. Iyad Rahwan and Guillermo Simari, Berlin, Springer, 2009.
• [40] Walton D., Informal Logic: A Handbook for Critical Argumentation, Cambridge University Press, New York 1989.
• [41] Walton D., Reed Ch., Macagno F., Argumentation Schemes, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 2008.

Uwagi

1. Opracowanie rekordu ze środków MNiSW, umowa Nr 461252 w ramach programu "Społeczna odpowiedzialność nauki" - moduł: Popularyzacja nauki i promocja sportu (2021). 2. Błędna numeracja bibliografii.