Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Toulmin Argument Model in Artificial Intelligence

Or: how semi-formal, defeasible argumentation schemes creep into logic

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence

In 1958, Toulmin published The Uses of Argument. Although this anti-formalistic monograph initially received mixed reviews (see section 2 of [20] for Toulmin’s own recounting of the reception of his book), it has become a classical text on argumentation, and the number of references to the book (when writing these words1 —by a nice numerological coincidence—1958) continues to grow (see [7] and the special issue of Argumentation 2005; Vol. 19, No. 3). Also the field of Artificial Intelligence has discovered Toulmin’s work. Especially four of Toulmin’s themes have found follow-up in Artificial Intelligence.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
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. K. D. Ashley. Modeling legal argument. Reasoning with cases and hypotheticals. The MIT Press, Cambridge (Massachusetts), 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  2. T. J. M. Bench-Capon. Persuasion in practical argument using value-based argumentation frameworks. Journal of Logic and Computation, 13(3):429–448, 2003.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  3. P. M. Dung. On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games. Artificial Intelligence, 77:321–357, 1995.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  4. E. T. Feteris. Fundamentals of legal argumentation. A Survey of Theories on the Justification of Judicial Decisions. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  5. T. F. Gordon. The Pleadings Game. An Artificial Intelligence Model of Procedural Justice. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  6. J. C. Hage. A theory of legal reasoning and a logic to match. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 4:199–273, 1996.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. D. L. Hitchcock and B. Verheij, editors. Arguing on the Toulmin Model. New Essays in Argument Analysis and Evaluation (Argumentation Library, Volume 10). Springer-Verlag, Dordrecht, 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  8. P. A. Kirschner, S. J. Buckingham Shum, and C. S. Carr. Visualizing Argumentation: Software Tools for Collaborative and Educational Sense-Making. Springer-Verlag, London, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  9. R. P. Loui. Hart’s critics on defeasible concepts and ascriptivism. In The Fifth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law. Proceedings of the Conference, pages 21–30. ACM, New York (New York), 1995.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  10. R. P. Loui and J. Norman. Rationales and argument moves. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 3:159–189, 1995.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. J. L. Pollock. Defeasible reasoning. Cognitive Science, 11:481–518, 1987.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. J. L. Pollock. Cognitive Carpentry: A Blueprint for How to Build a Person. The MIT Press, Cambridge (Massachusetts), 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  13. H. Prakken and G. Sartor. A dialectical model of assessing conflicting arguments in legal reasoning. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 4:331–368, 1996.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. R. Reiter. A logic for default reasoning. Artificial Intelligence, 13:81–132, 1980.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  16. S. J. Russell and P. Norvig. Artificial Intelligence. A Modern Approach. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River (New Jersey), 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  17. G. R. Simari and R. P. Loui. A mathematical treatment of defeasible reasoning and its applications. Artificial Intelligence, 53:125–157, 1992.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  18. S. E. Toulmin. The Uses of Argument. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1958.

    Google Scholar 

  19. S. E. Toulmin. The Uses of Argument. Updated Edition. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  20. S. E. Toulmin. Reasoning in theory and practice. In D. L. Hitchcock and B. Verheij, editors, Arguing on the Toulmin Model. New Essays in Argument Analysis and Evaluation (Argumentation Library, Volume 10)., pages 25–30. Springer-Verlag, Dordrecht, 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  21. F. H. van Eemeren, R. Grootendorst, S. Jackson, and S. Jacobs. Reconstructing Argumentative Dialogue. The University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa (Alabama), 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  22. F. H. van Eemeren, R. Grootendorst, and F. Snoeck Henkemans. Fundamentals of Argumentation Theory. A Handbook of Historical Backgrounds and Contemporary Developments. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah (New Jersey), 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  23. B. Verheij. DefLog: on the logical interpretation of prima facie justified assumptions. Journal of Logic and Computation, 13(3):319–346, 2003.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  24. B. Verheij. Dialectical argumentation with argumentation schemes: An approach to legal logic. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 11(1-2):167–195, 2003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. B. Verheij. Evaluating arguments based on toulmin’s scheme. Argumentation, 19(3):347–371, 2005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. B. Verheij. Virtual arguments. On the design of argument assistants for lawyers and other arguers. TMC Asser Press, The Hague, 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  27. B. Verheij. Argumentation support software: Boxes-and-arrows and beyond. Law, Probability and Risk, 6:187–208, 2007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. B. Verheij, J. C. Hage, and H. J. van den Herik. An integrated view on rules and principles. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 6(1):3–26, 1998.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. G. A. W. Vreeswijk. Studies in defeasible argumentation. 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  30. G. A. W. Vreeswijk. Abstract argumentation systems. Artificial Intelligence, 90:225–279, 1997.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  31. D. N. Walton. Argument Schemes for Presumptive Reasoning. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah (New Jersey), 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  32. D. N. Walton. The New Dialectic: Conversational Contexts of Argument. University of Toronto Press, Toronto, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  33. D. N. Walton and E. Krabbe. Commitment in Dialogue. Basic Concepts of Interpersonal Reasoning. State University of New York Press, Albany (New York), 1995.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The author would like to thank David Hitchcock and James Freeman for comments on a prepublication version of this text.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Artificial Intelligence, University of Groningen, Utrecht, Netherlands

    Bart Verheij

Authors
  1. Bart Verheij
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

    Rights and permissions

    Reprints and permissions

    Copyright information

    © 2009 Springer-Verlag US

    About this chapter

    Cite this chapter

    Verheij, B. (2009). The Toulmin Argument Model in Artificial Intelligence. In: Simari, G., Rahwan, I. (eds) Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-98197-0_11

    Download citation

    • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-98197-0_11

    • 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

    Search

    Navigation