Skip to main content

Argumentation Theory: A Very Short Introduction

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence

Since the time of the ancient Greek philosophers and rhetoricians, argumentation theorists have searched for the requirements that make an argument correct, by some appropriate standard of proof, by examining the errors of reasoning we make when we try to use arguments. These errors have long been called fallacies, and the logic textbooks have for over 2000 years tried to help students to identify these fallacies, and to deal with them when they are encountered. The problem was that deductive logic did not seem to be much use for this purpose, and there seemed to be no other obvious formal structure that could usefully be applied to them.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. D. Walton. and C. Reed and F. Macagno. Argumentation Schemes. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  2. T. J. M. Bench-Capon. Persuasion in practical argument using value-based argumentation frameworks. Logic and Computation, 13:429–448, 2003.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  3. P. E. Dunne. Argumentation and dialogue in artificial intelligence, IJCAI 2005 tutorial notes. Technical report, Department of Computer Science, University of Liverpool, 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  4. P. Besnard and A. Hunter. Elements of Argumentation. MIT Press, Cambridge MA, USA, 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  5. P. M. Dung. On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games. Artificial Intelligence, 77(2):321–358, 1995.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  6. T. F. Gordon, H. Prakken, and D. Walton. The Carneades model of argument and burden of proof. Artificial Intelligence, 171(10–15):875–896, 2007.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  7. C. L. Hamblin. Fallacies. Methuen, London, UK, 1970.

    Google Scholar 

  8. P. J. Hurley. A Concise Introduction to Logic. Belmot, Wadsworth, CA, USA, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  9. R. H. Johnson and A. J. Blair. The current state of informal logic. Informal Logic, 9:147–151, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  10. E. C. W. Krabbe. Nothing but objections. In H. V. Hansen and R. C. Pinto, editors, Reason Reclaimed. Vale Press, Newport News, Virginia, USA, 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  11. D. H. Peter McBurney and S. Parsons. The eightfold way of delib-eration dialogue. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 22(1):95–132, 2007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. H. Prakken. Formal systems for persuasion dialogue. The Knowledge Engineering Review, 21(2):163–188, 2006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. H. Prakken and G. Sartor. Formalising arguments about the burden of persuasion. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, pages 97–106. ACM Press, New York NY, USA, 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  14. C. Reed and G. Rowe. Araucaria: Software for argument analysis. International Journal of AI Tools, 14(3–4):961–980, 2004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. N. Rescher. Introduction to Logic. St. Martin’s Press, New York NY, USA, 1964.

    Google Scholar 

  16. H. Thorsrud. Cicero on his academics predecessors: the fallibilism of Arcesilaus and Carneades. Journal of the History of Philosophy, 40(1):1–18, 2002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. F. H. van Eemeren and R. F. Grootendorst. A Systematic Theory of Argumentation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  18. D. N. Walton and E. C. W. Krabbe. Commitment in Dialogue: Basic Concepts of Interpersonal Reasoning. SUNY Press, Albany NY, USA, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  19. S. Wells and C. Reed. Knowing when to bargain: the roles of negotiation and persuasion in dialogue. In F. Grasso, R. Kibble, and C. Reed, editors, Proceedings of the ECAI workshop on Computational Models of Natural Argument (CMNA), Riva del Garda, Italy, 2006.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Douglas Walton .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2009 Springer-Verlag US

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Walton, D. (2009). Argumentation Theory: A Very Short Introduction. In: Simari, G., Rahwan, I. (eds) Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-98197-0_1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-98197-0_1

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA

  • Print ISBN: 978-0-387-98196-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-0-387-98197-0

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics