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.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
D. Walton. and C. Reed and F. Macagno. Argumentation Schemes. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2008.
T. J. M. Bench-Capon. Persuasion in practical argument using value-based argumentation frameworks. Logic and Computation, 13:429–448, 2003.
P. E. Dunne. Argumentation and dialogue in artificial intelligence, IJCAI 2005 tutorial notes. Technical report, Department of Computer Science, University of Liverpool, 2005.
P. Besnard and A. Hunter. Elements of Argumentation. MIT Press, Cambridge MA, USA, 2008.
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.
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.
C. L. Hamblin. Fallacies. Methuen, London, UK, 1970.
P. J. Hurley. A Concise Introduction to Logic. Belmot, Wadsworth, CA, USA, 1994.
R. H. Johnson and A. J. Blair. The current state of informal logic. Informal Logic, 9:147–151, 1987.
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.
D. H. Peter McBurney and S. Parsons. The eightfold way of delib-eration dialogue. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 22(1):95–132, 2007.
H. Prakken. Formal systems for persuasion dialogue. The Knowledge Engineering Review, 21(2):163–188, 2006.
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.
C. Reed and G. Rowe. Araucaria: Software for argument analysis. International Journal of AI Tools, 14(3–4):961–980, 2004.
N. Rescher. Introduction to Logic. St. Martin’s Press, New York NY, USA, 1964.
H. Thorsrud. Cicero on his academics predecessors: the fallibilism of Arcesilaus and Carneades. Journal of the History of Philosophy, 40(1):1–18, 2002.
F. H. van Eemeren and R. F. Grootendorst. A Systematic Theory of Argumentation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2004.
D. N. Walton and E. C. W. Krabbe. Commitment in Dialogue: Basic Concepts of Interpersonal Reasoning. SUNY Press, Albany NY, USA, 1995.
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.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights 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)