Individual Differences in the "Myside Bias" in Reasoning and Written Argumentation

Science.gov (United States)

Wolfe, Christopher R.

2012-01-01

Three studies examined the "myside bias" in reasoning, evaluating written arguments, and writing argumentative essays. Previous research suggests that some people possess a fact-based argumentation schema and some people have a balanced argumentation schema. I developed reliable Likert scale instruments (1-7 rating) for these constructs…

Scientific Reasoning and Argumentation: Advancing an Interdisciplinary Research Agenda in Education

Science.gov (United States)

Fischer, Frank; Kollar, Ingo; Ufer, Stefan; Sodian, Beate; Hussmann, Heinrich; Pekrun, Reinhard; Neuhaus, Birgit; Dorner, Birgit; Pankofer, Sabine; Fischer, Martin; Strijbos, Jan-Willem; Heene, Moritz; Eberle, Julia

2014-01-01

Scientific reasoning and scientific argumentation are highly valued outcomes of K-12 and higher education. In this article, we first review main topics and key findings of three different strands of research, namely research on the development of scientific reasoning, research on scientific argumentation, and research on approaches to support…

The biased use of argument evaluation criteria in motivated reasoning; Does argument quality depend on the evaluators' standpoint?

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Hoeken, J.A.L.; Van Vugt, M.

2016-01-01

People without a background in argumentation theory possess several criteria to distinguish strong from weak arguments. The fact that people have these criteria does not imply that they will use them to objectively assess the quality of an argument. Research on motivated reasoning suggests that

Reasoning with Inductive Argument Test: A Study of Validity and Reliability

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Mehmet Emrah Karadere

2013-11-01

Full Text Available Reasoning with Inductive Argument Test:A Study of Validity and Reliability Objective: The aim of our study is to research reliability and validity and to evaluate the usability of Turkish version of Reasoning with Inductive Argument Test (RIAT in Turkish healty population. Method: 51 healty volunteers who work in Ankara Dıskapi Yildirim Beyazit Research and Training Hospital participated in this study. Reasoning with Inductive Argument Test (RIAT was translated into Turkish by three clinical good knowledge of English. Participants were given a sociodemographic data form, and RIAT were performed by clinicians. To test the reliability of the Turkish version of RIAT, Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was calculated and the halving method was used for the test. Results: The internal consistency of the Reasoning with Inductive Argument Test (RIAT items, Cronbach’s alpha internal consistency coefficient measurements of 0.73 was found to be statistically significant. Spearman-Brown coefficient that determines the reliability of the whole test r=0.74 was found. Kurtosis values of all the items was below 1.5 and the percentages in the second evaluation were mainly lower. At the same time, both change in belief between self produced RIAT options and given RIAT options (p=0.02, z=-2296 as well as changes in beliefs between related and unrelated items for Obsessive Compulsive Disorder (OCD difference (p=0.03, z=-2.199 were significant. Conclusion: The preliminary data obtained from the study of reliability and validity of the scale shows that ‘Reasoning with Inductive Argument Test’ supports reliability and validity in Turkish population.

Others and Imagination in Reasoning and Argumentation: Improving our Critical Creative Capacity

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Michael D. Baumtrog

2017-06-01

Full Text Available Contemporary argumentation theories highlight the importance of Others for contributing to and critiquing an individual’s reasoning and/or argumentation. Reasoners and arguers are encouraged to interact with imagined constructs such as a community of model interlocutors or universal audience. These model interlocutors are theoretically meant to bring to mind reasons and counter-considerations that may not have been conceived of otherwise so as to improve the overall quality of an instance of reasoning or argumentation. Overlooked, however, is the impact of differing individual’s imaginative abilities. This paper argues that more important than relying on an Other, real or imagined, reasoners and arguers would do just as well to improve their own creative abilities first. Consulting a real or imagined Other may help in some cases help, but such a strong reliance on Others comes with serious limitations.

Others and Imagination in Reasoning and Argumentation: Improving our Critical Creative Capacity

OpenAIRE

Michael D. Baumtrog

2017-01-01

Contemporary argumentation theories highlight the importance of Others for contributing to and critiquing an individual’s reasoning and/or argumentation. Reasoners and arguers are encouraged to interact with imagined constructs such as a community of model interlocutors or universal audience. These model interlocutors are theoretically meant to bring to mind reasons and counter-considerations that may not have been conceived of otherwise so as to improve the overall quality of an instance of ...

Modelling Legal Argument: Reasoning with Cases and Hypotheticals

Science.gov (United States)

1988-02-01

case- based reasoning plays an important role in such diverse domains as law [Levi, 1949), historical political analysis [Neustadt and May, 1986; Alker...contained information on physical, economic and political disputes and common mediation 5 tactics, their failures and corrections for those failures...library of 13 Wall Street. He had opera tickets in his pocket for 8:00 that night - "Pagliacci" - and his socialite fiance and her parents were to

Modeling the Effects of Argument Length and Validity on Inductive and Deductive Reasoning

Science.gov (United States)

Rotello, Caren M.; Heit, Evan

2009-01-01

In an effort to assess models of inductive reasoning and deductive reasoning, the authors, in 3 experiments, examined the effects of argument length and logical validity on evaluation of arguments. In Experiments 1a and 1b, participants were given either induction or deduction instructions for a common set of stimuli. Two distinct effects were…

Argumentation from reasonableness in the justification of judicial decisions

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Feteris, E.T.; Bustamante, T.; Dahlman, C.

2015-01-01

In legal decision-making reasonableness plays an important role. In the literature, generally speaking, there is a consensus that reasonableness as a norm for judges in the application of law implies that they take into account a combination of different considerations of a normative and factual

Some Clarifications about the Argumentative Theory of Reasoning. A Reply to Santibáñez Yañez (2012.

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Hugo Mercier

2012-06-01

Full Text Available In “Mercier and Sperber’s Argumentative Theory of Reasoning: From Psychology of Reasoning to Argumentation Studies” (2012 Santibáñez Yañez offers constructive comments and criticisms of the argumentative theory of reasoning. The purpose of this reply is twofold. First, it seeks to clarify two points broached by Yanez: (1 the relation between reasoning (in this specific theory and dual process accounts in general and (2 the benefits that can be derived from reasoning and argumentation (again, in this specific theory. Second, it suggests one domain—the categorization of arguments—in which argumentation studies and the argumentative theory of reasoning could usefully complement each other to yield a better understanding of the processes of argumentation.

Exploratory Talk, Argumentation and Reasoning in Mexican Primary School Children

Science.gov (United States)

Rojas-Drummond, Sylvia; Zapata, Margarita Peon

2004-01-01

The study analyses the effects of training primary school children in the use of a linguistic tool called "Exploratory Talk" (ET) on their capacity for argumentation. ET allows for reasoned confrontation and negotiation of points of view, making the reasoning visible in the talk. Eighty-eight Mexican children from the 5th and 6th grades…

Arguments from parallel reasoning

NARCIS (Netherlands)

van Laar, Jan Albert; Ribeiro, H.J.

2014-01-01

Argumentation is a co-production by a proponent and an opponent who engage in a critical examination of their difference of opinion, aiming to resolve it on the merits of both sides, or so I assume in this paper. I shall investigate the consequences of this view for a particular type of argument

The inextricable entanglement of argumentation and interpretation in law

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Marković Miloš

2017-01-01

Full Text Available At the basis of tireless efforts to explain the nature of law lies the question of how judges should decide cases. Therefrom arises a need for a theory that would clarify the role of the courts and, moreover, provide guidance to them on reaching judgments. The history of legal theory abounds with various attempts to offer a generally acceptable answer to the question raised. The fervor of debate and the perpetual dissatisfaction with offered solutions prompted the thought of untamable arbitrariness of judges. In the contemporary debate the significance of argumentation is particularly emphasized as a link of the court procedure which provides reasonableness and therewith justification and persuasiveness of the decision. Before going into the matter, I will indicate in broad strokes which areas of legal theory do argumentation and interpretation belong to. The purpose of setting a conceptual framework is to prevent losing sight of the whole as well as to limit the scope of discourse to a certain section of legal issues. The second part deals with the concept of argumentation in general and some specific features of the argumentation in law. The third part examines the role of legal interpretation and draws a clear distinction between the interpretation as a process and the interpretation as a result. At the end of the discussion I shall put forward a thesis that the interpretation as a process is argumentation, while the interpretation as a result is an argument in the justification of judgment.

Constitutional Legal Regulation And The Reasons For The Legal Nihilism Existence In Modern Russian Society

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Dmitriy E. Nekrasov

2014-09-01

Full Text Available In the present article questions of constitutional and legal regulation and reason for the legal nihilism existence, methods and forms of fight against legal nihilism are considered. Reasons of low legal culture in modern Russian society and ways of the population's legal literacy increase in general are allocated. These problems are extremely topical today as at the 1990th when there was a reorientation of values, ideals and the principles and legislative base was significantly changed, people were simply lost, and it was extremely difficult for them to realize and accept new, absolutely other reality. Today peculiar spiritual and valuable "reconstruct" did not pass completely and the state is obliged to help citizens to carry out it most without serious consequences and successfully. In the conclusion authors draw a conclusion that: first, the problem of legal nihilism more than ever now is particularly acute for modern Russian society. The policy of the state has to be directed by the consciousness of citizens, who understand that law is the integral and obligatory part of the order in the country and that it is one of the basic for any person. Secondly, one of the ways to overcome the legal nihilism consists in the increase of the legal culture level along with the development of effective legal policy. Thirdly, legal idealism, reevaluation of opportunities in law gains especially wide circulation in the years of changes in response to social expectations an insufficiently skilled legislator forms a belief that it is enough to adopt good laws, and all problems would be solved.

Reasoning with Inductive Argument Test: A Study of Validity and Reliability

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Mehmet Emrah Karadere

2013-12-01

Conclusion: The preliminary data obtained from the study of reliability and validity of the scale shows that ‘Reasoning with Inductive Argument Test’ supports reliability and validity in Turkish population. [JCBPR 2013; 2(3.000: 156-161

How clear is transparent? Reporting expert reasoning in legal cases

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Sjerps, M.J.; Berger, C.E.H.

2012-01-01

Experts providing evidence in legal cases are universally recommended to be transparent, particularly in their reasoning, so that legal practitioners can critically check whether the conclusions are adequately supported by the results. However, when exploring the practical meaning of this

Disgust and biological descriptions bias logical reasoning during legal decision-making.

Science.gov (United States)

Capestany, Beatrice H; Harris, Lasana T

2014-01-01

Legal decisions often require logical reasoning about the mental states of people who perform gruesome behaviors. We use functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to examine how brain regions implicated in logical reasoning are modulated by emotion and social cognition during legal decision-making. Participants read vignettes describing crimes that elicit strong or weak disgust matched on punishment severity using the US Federal Sentencing Guidelines. An extraneous sentence at the end of each vignette described the perpetrator's personality using traits or biological language, mimicking the increased use of scientific evidence presented in courts. Behavioral results indicate that crimes weak in disgust receive significantly less punishment than the guidelines recommend. Neuroimaging results indicate that brain regions active during logical reasoning respond less to crimes weak in disgust and biological descriptions of personality, demonstrating the impact of emotion and social cognition on logical reasoning mechanisms necessary for legal decision-making.

Improving students’ creative mathematical reasoning ability students through adversity quotient and argument driven inquiry learning

Science.gov (United States)

Hidayat, W.; Wahyudin; Prabawanto, S.

2018-01-01

This study aimed to investigate the role factors of Adversity Quotient (AQ) and Argument-Driven Inquiry (ADI) instruction in improving mathematical creative reasoning ability from students’ who is a candidate for a math teacher. The study was designed in the form of experiments with a pretest-posttest control group design that aims to examine the role of Adversity Quotient (AQ) and Argument-Driven Inquiry (ADI) learning on improving students’ mathematical creative reasoning abilities. The population in this research was the student of mathematics teacher candidate in Cimahi City, while the sample of this research was 90 students of the candidate of the teacher of mathematics specified purposively then determined randomly which belong to experiment class and control class. Based on the results and discussion, it was concluded that: (1) Improvement the ability of mathematical creative reasoning of students’ who was a candidate for a math teacher who received Argument-Driven Inquiry (ADI) instruction is better than those who received direct instruction is reviewed based on the whole; (2) There was no different improvement the ability of mathematical creative reasoning of students’ who is a candidate for a math teacher who received Argument-Driven Inquiry (ADI) instruction and direct instruction was reviewed based on the type of Adversity Quotient (Quitter / AQ Low, Champer / AQ Medium, and the Climber / AQ High); (3) Learning factors and type of Adversity Quotient (AQ) affected the improvement of students’ mathematical creative reasoning ability. In addition, there was no interaction effect between learning and AQ together in developing of students’ mathematical creative reasoning ability; (4) mathematical creative reasoning ability of students’ who is a candidate for math teacher had not been achieved optimally on the indicators novelty.

Public Health and Legal Arguments in Favor of a Policy to Cap the Portion Sizes of Sugar-Sweetened Beverages.

Science.gov (United States)

Roberto, Christina A; Pomeranz, Jennifer L

2015-11-01

In 2012, the New York City Board of Health passed a regulation prohibiting the sale of sugar-sweetened beverages in containers above 16 ounces in the city's food service establishments. The beverage industry and various retailers sued the city to prevent enforcement of the law, arguing that the board had overstepped its authority. In June 2014, the state's highest court agreed and struck down the regulation. Here we report the results of a content analysis of the public testimony related to the case submitted to the New York City Department of Mental Health and Hygiene. We identified major arguments in support of and against the sugar-sweetened beverage portion limit policy. We offer legal and scientific arguments that challenge the major anti-policy arguments and contend that, although this policy was not implemented in New York City, it can be legally pursued by other legislatures.

The Use of Extra-Legal Arguments in the Judicial Interpretation of European Contract Law: A Case Study on Aziz v Catalunyacaixa (CJEU, 14 March 2013, Case C-415/11)

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Mańko, R.

2015-01-01

The Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) is well known for its preference for extra-legal legal arguments over intra-legal ones. Indeed, in the CJEU’s interpretive practice, as a rule, linguistic arguments give way to systemic and teleological ones, and the Court’s prevalent approach favours policy

Argumentation and Reasoning in Design: An Empirical Analysis of the Effects of Verbal Reasoning on Idea Value in Group Idea Generation

DEFF Research Database (Denmark)

Cramer-Petersen, Claus L.; Ahmed-Kristensen, Saeema

2016-01-01

Reasoning is argumentative and is at the core of design activity and thinking. Understanding the influence of reasoning on the value of ideas is key to support design practice. The paper aims to show the effect of verbal reasoning on the value of ideas. Protocol analyses of four industry cases...... doing idea generation shows that framing by certainty and deductive reasoning lead to useful incremental ideas while framing by uncertainty and abductive reasoning lead to radical ideas. The paper concludes that the way of framing ideas is indicative of how ideas add value to on-going design processes....

The death of argument fallacies in agent based reasoning

CERN Document Server

Woods, John

2004-01-01

This book is a sequel to the classic work, Fallacies Selected Papers 1972 - 1982 (1989), coauthored with Douglas Walton, and is a further major contribution to the Woods-Walton Approach to the logic of fallacious reasoning No one disputes the formitable accomplishments of modern mathematical logic; but equally no one seriously believes that classical logic is much good for the analysis of real-life argument and reasoning, or that it is the best place in which to transact the business of fallacy theory One of the principal innovations of the book is its adaptation of systems of logic to the particular requirements of fallacy theory The book develops logical analyses which take into account such features of real-life cognitive agency as resource- availability and computational complexity The book is also an invitation to interdisciplinary cooperation, linking the relevant branches of logic with computer science, cognitive psychology, neurobiology, forensic science, linguistics, (including conversational analysi...

On argumentation schemes and the natural classification of arguments

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Katzav, J.K.; Reed, C.

2004-01-01

We develop conceptions of arguments and of argument types that will, by serving as the basis for developing a natural classification of arguments, benefit work in artificial intelligence. Focusing only on arguments construed as the semantic entities that are the outcome of processes of reasoning, we

THE EFFECT OF SUMMARIZATION INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES AND PRESENTATION FORMATS ON THE OUTCOMES OF HISTORICAL ARGUMENTATIVE REASONING

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Susanto Yunus Alfian

2014-07-01

Full Text Available The purpose of this research is to examine the effects of summarization instructional strategies and presentation formats on the learning outcomes of history argumentative reasoning. This study is designed as a factorial design. The subjects were the students enrolled in four state-owned sehior high school in Malang Regency. The main conclusions are presented as follow: (1 A significant difference existed for students who used the cause-effect graphic organizer summarization strategy to answer history argumentative reasoning post-test questions when compared to the written summarizing strategy, (2 There is no difference between those who were presented with present-subheadings presentation format and those who were presented absent-subheadings on answering history argumentative reasoning posttest questions, and (3 There is a significant interaction between the summarization instructional strategies and the presentation formats. The students who used cause-effect graphic organizer summarization strategy and were given with the present-subheadings presentation format significantly outperformed in the historical  argumentative reasoning post-test scores than the other groups (graphic organizer and absent-subheadings group, written summarizing and with-subheadings group, and written summarizing and without-subheadings group.Key Words:  summarization instructional strategy, presentation format, cause-effect graphic organizer, written summarizing, present-subheadings, historical argumentative reasoning.Tujuan dari penelitian ini adalah untuk mengetahui pengaruh strategi pembelajaran summarization dan format presentasi tentang hasil belajar sejarah penalaran argumentatif. Penelitian ini dirancang sebagai desain faktorial. Subjek penelitian adalah siswa terdaftar di empat sekolah SMA di Kabupaten Malang. Kesimpulan utama disajikan sebagai berikut: (1 Sebuah perbedaan yang signifikan ada bagi siswa yang menggunakan strategi peringkasan untuk menjawab

Negligence and the legal standard of care: what is 'reasonable' conduct?

Science.gov (United States)

Miola, José

Medical negligence has become a big issue for medical practitioners. Fear of the law, and of litigation, has led to claims of defensive medical practice among doctors and nurses. At the heart of this lies the legal definition of the standard of care, where the law seeks to determine when conduct is 'reasonable' (and thus not negligent), or 'unreasonable' (and thus a breach of the legal duty of care and potentially negligent). In this article the author clarifies what the law means by 'reasonableness' with respect to nurses, drawing on both the law and the NMC Code. Furthermore, the article shall demonstrate that the law is not something to be fearful of but, rather, demands a standard no higher than that of the NMC.

Non-faith-based arguments against physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia.

Science.gov (United States)

Sulmasy, Daniel P; Travaline, John M; Mitchell, Louise A; Ely, E Wesley

2016-08-01

This article is a complement to "A Template for Non-Religious-Based Discussions Against Euthanasia" by Melissa Harintho, Nathaniel Bloodworth, and E. Wesley Ely which appeared in the February 2015 Linacre Quarterly . Herein we build upon Daniel Sulmasy's opening and closing arguments from the 2014 Intelligence Squared debate on legalizing assisted suicide, supplemented by other non-faith-based arguments and thoughts, providing four nontheistic arguments against physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia: (1) "it offends me"; (2) slippery slope; (3) "pain can be alleviated"; (4) physician integrity and patient trust. Lay Summary: Presented here are four non-religious, reasonable arguments against physician-assisted suicide and euthanasia: (1) "it offends me," suicide devalues human life; (2) slippery slope, the limits on euthanasia gradually erode; (3) "pain can be alleviated," palliative care and modern therapeutics more and more adequately manage pain; (4) physician integrity and patient trust, participating in suicide violates the integrity of the physician and undermines the trust patients place in physicians to heal and not to harm.

Multiculturalism and legal autonomy for cultural minorities

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Morten Ebbe Juul Nielsen

2013-11-01

Full Text Available Does multiculturalism imply that certain cultural minorities – nomos groups, whose cultural conceptions extend in important ways into views about the law – should have forms of legal autonomy that go beyond normal multicultural accommodations such as exemptions and special protection? In other words: should we allow «minority jurisdictions» for multicultural reasons and give certain minorities powers of legislation and adjudication on certain issues? The paper sketches how one might arrive at such a conclusion given some standard multicultural reasoning, and then proceeds by examining eight key rejoinders to such a proposal. None of these rejoinders provide by themselves knockdown arguments against extending multicultural rights to forms of legal autonomy, but together they do provide a basis for some skepticism about the cogency and desirability of at least more ambitious forms of legal autonomy for cultural minorities within a liberal framework.http://dx.doi.org/10.5324/eip.v7i2.1798

On argumentation schemes and the natural classification of arguments

OpenAIRE

Katzav, K.; Reed, C.

2004-01-01

We develop conceptions of arguments and of argument types that will, by serving as the basis for developing a natural classification of arguments, benefit work in artificial intelligence. Focusing only on arguments construed as the semantic entities that are the outcome of processes of reasoning, we outline and clarify our view that an argument is a proposition that represents a fact as both conveying some other fact and as doing so wholly. Further, we outline our view that, with respect to a...

"...because I am something special" or "I think I will be something like a guinea pig": information and assent of legal minors in clinical trials – assessment of understanding, appreciation and reasoning

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Schulze Ulrike

2009-01-01

Full Text Available Abstract Background The aim of this study is to assess and evaluate the capacities for understanding, appreciation and reasoning of legal minors with psychiatric disorders and their parents and their competence to consent or assent to participation in clinical trials. The beliefs, fears, motivation and influencing factors for decision-making of legal minors and parents were also examined. Methods Using the MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool for Clinical Research (MacCAT-CR, an instrument developed for adults whose capacities to consent are unclear, we provided information about clinical trials and assessed understanding, appreciation and reasoning. We adapted this tool for legal minors and examined 19 children and adolescents between the ages of 7 and 15 with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD or ADHD combined with oppositional defiant disorder (DSM-IV 314.00/314.01/312.8 enrolled in clinical trials. Parents were also examined using the MacCAT-CR. Results Facts such as the procedures involved in trials or their duration were well understood by legal minors, but more abstract issues like the primary purpose of the trial were not understood by children and adolescents or by many parents. Legal minors also had difficulties understanding the nature of placebo and the probability of receiving placebo. Children's and adolescents' decisions were influenced by fears about their disorder worsening and by problems in their relationship with their parents. Parents wanted the best therapy for their children in order to minimize problems in school. Conclusion Legal minors and parents need to be informed more precisely about specific issues like placebo and the primary purpose of trials. In general, the reasoning of children and adolescents was influenced by their experience with their disorder and decision making was based on reasonable arguments. Their fears were based on everyday experiences such as school performance or family relationships.

"...because I am something special" or "I think I will be something like a guinea pig": information and assent of legal minors in clinical trials – assessment of understanding, appreciation and reasoning

Science.gov (United States)

Koelch, Michael; Singer, Hanneke; Prestel, Anja; Burkert, Jessica; Schulze, Ulrike; Fegert, Jörg M

2009-01-01

Background The aim of this study is to assess and evaluate the capacities for understanding, appreciation and reasoning of legal minors with psychiatric disorders and their parents and their competence to consent or assent to participation in clinical trials. The beliefs, fears, motivation and influencing factors for decision-making of legal minors and parents were also examined. Methods Using the MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool for Clinical Research (MacCAT-CR), an instrument developed for adults whose capacities to consent are unclear, we provided information about clinical trials and assessed understanding, appreciation and reasoning. We adapted this tool for legal minors and examined 19 children and adolescents between the ages of 7 and 15 with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) or ADHD combined with oppositional defiant disorder (DSM-IV 314.00/314.01/312.8) enrolled in clinical trials. Parents were also examined using the MacCAT-CR. Results Facts such as the procedures involved in trials or their duration were well understood by legal minors, but more abstract issues like the primary purpose of the trial were not understood by children and adolescents or by many parents. Legal minors also had difficulties understanding the nature of placebo and the probability of receiving placebo. Children's and adolescents' decisions were influenced by fears about their disorder worsening and by problems in their relationship with their parents. Parents wanted the best therapy for their children in order to minimize problems in school. Conclusion Legal minors and parents need to be informed more precisely about specific issues like placebo and the primary purpose of trials. In general, the reasoning of children and adolescents was influenced by their experience with their disorder and decision making was based on reasonable arguments. Their fears were based on everyday experiences such as school performance or family relationships. PMID:19175905

Action-Based Jurisprudence: Praxeological Legal Theory in Relation to Economic Theory, Ethics, and Legal Practice

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Konrad Graf

2011-08-01

Full Text Available Action-based legal theory is a discrete branch of praxeology and the basis of an emerging school of jurisprudence related to, but distinct from, natural law. Legal theory and economic theory share content that is part of praxeology itself: the action axiom, the a priori of argumentation, universalizable property theory, and counterfactual-deductive methodology. Praxeological property-norm justification is separate from the strictly ethical “ought” question of selecting ends in an action context. Examples of action-based jurisprudence are found in existing “Austro-libertarian” literature. Legal theory and legal practice must remain distinct and work closely together if justice is to be found in real cases. Legal theorizing was shaped in religious ethical contexts, which contributed to confused field boundaries between law and ethics. The carrot and stick influence of rulers on theorists has distorted conventional economics and jurisprudence in particular directions over the course of centuries. An action-based approach is relatively immune to such sources of distortion in its methods and conclusions, but has tended historically to be marginalized from conventional institutions for this same reason.

3. RO Badru and TR Eegunlusi Colonial Legal Reasoning pp.11-39

African Journals Online (AJOL)

REGINALDS

Glossary. Epistemology: a branch of philosophy which focuses on a critical and systematic ..... very slender accomplishments, like a parrot, who speaks a few words .... Colonial Legal Reasoning and African Metaphysical Epistemology 25.

Defining Rhetorical Argumentation

DEFF Research Database (Denmark)

Kock, Christian Erik J

2013-01-01

This article argues for a definition of rhetorical argumentation based on the theme of the argumentation, i.e., the issue in dispute - rather than its aim (e.g., to ‘win’) or its means (e.g., emotional appeals). The principal thinkers in the rhetorical tradition, from Aristotle onwards, saw...... rhetoric as practical reasoning, i.e., reasoning on proposals for action or choice, not on propositions that may be either true or false. Citing several contemporary philosophers, the article argues that such a definition acquits rhetorical argumentation of any culpable unconcern with truth and explains...

Comment repenser le rapport de la rhétorique et de l’argumentation ? How should we consider the relationship between rhetoric and argumentation?

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Michel Meyer

2009-04-01

Full Text Available La rhétorique, dit Aristote, est le pendant de la dialectique et de l’argumentation. Cela pose le problème de leur harmonisation au sein d’une théorie unifiée, où la rhétorique littéraire voisine avec la logique juridique. La problématologie est cette conception unifiée. Les questions expresses relèvent du conflit argumenté, comme en droit, qui les codifie, et les questions indirectes, des réponses qui les avalent par l’élégance et le style pour se faire passer pour résolutoires de ces questions. La rhétorique est la négociation de la distance entre les individus sur une question donnée, une question plus ou moins problématique et conflictuelle. La problématologie est à la base d’une véritable nouvelle rhétorique, avec de nouvelles prémisses fondées sur le questionnement, laissées jusque-là en friche. Des figures de rhétorique à l’inférence du vraisemblable, le questionnement est le socle où viennent s’articuler la raison, le langage et la persuasion.According to Aristotle, rhetoric is the counterpart of argumentation. How can we understand the relationship between literary, rhetoric and legal reasoning, if we do not have a general theory of rhetoric? Problematology purports to be precisely that. Questions can be addressed either directly, as in law and legal conflict, where the questions, the pros and the contras are, so to speak, on the table, or indirectly,through their answers, as if they were solved thereby. Rhetoric is the negotiation of the differences between the orator and the audience on a given question, which can be more or less problematic, rhetorical or argumentative. Problematology is the founding theory behind this “new” rhetoric. From the figures of speech to plausible inference, the theory of questioning offers an integrated view of reason, language and persuasion.

THE RELEVANCE OF SOCIO-LEGAL STUDIES IN LEGAL SCIENCE

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Victor Imanuel W. Nalle

2015-02-01

Full Text Available Some law schools in Indonesia reject socio-legal studies with epistemological arguments that puts jurisprudence as sui generis. Rejection is based argument that jurisprudence is a normative science. In fact socio-legal studies in the development of jurisprudence outside Indonesia has long existed and contributed to the legal reform. Socio-legal studies also significant for legal reform. It is caused by the existence of non doctrinal aspect in law making and implementation of the law. Therefore the position and relevance of socio-legal research is not related to the benefits that provided for the development of national law or jurisprudence. Beberapa fakultas hukum di Indonesia menolak penelitian sosio-legal dengan argumentasi epistemologis yang menempatkan ilmu hukum sebagai sui generis. Penolakan tersebut didasarkan argumentasi bahwa ilmu hukum adalah ilmu yang bersifat normatif. Kenyataannya studi sosio-legal dalam perkembangan ilmu hukum di luar Indonesia telah lama eksis dan berperan dalam pembaharuan hukum. Selain itu, studi sosiolegal juga berperan dalam pembaharuan hukum. Hal ini disebabkan adanya aspek-aspek nondoktrinal yang berperan dalam pembentukan hukum dan implementasi hukum di masyarakat. Oleh karena itu kedudukan dan relevansi penelitian sosio-legal pada ada tidaknya manfaat yang diberikan bagi perkembangan hukum nasional ataupun ilmu hukum.

THE RELEVANCE OF SOCIO-LEGAL STUDIES IN LEGAL SCIENCE

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Victor Imanuel W. Nalle

2015-02-01

Full Text Available Some law schools in Indonesia reject socio-legal studies with epistemological arguments that puts jurisprudence as sui generis. Rejection is based argument that jurisprudence is a normative science. In fact socio-legal studies in the development of jurisprudence outside Indonesia has long existed and contributed to the legal reform. Socio-legal studies also significant for legal reform. It is caused by the existence of non doctrinal aspect in law making and implementation of the law. Therefore the position and relevance of socio-legal research is not related to the benefits that provided for the development of national law or jurisprudence.   Beberapa fakultas hukum di Indonesia menolak penelitian sosio-legal dengan argumentasi epistemologis yang menempatkan ilmu hukum sebagai sui generis. Penolakan tersebut didasarkan argumentasi bahwa ilmu hukum adalah ilmu yang bersifat normatif. Kenyataannya studi sosio-legal dalam perkembangan ilmu hukum di luar Indonesia telah lama eksis dan berperan dalam pembaharuan hukum. Selain itu, studi sosiolegal juga berperan dalam pembaharuan hukum. Hal ini disebabkan adanya aspek-aspek nondoktrinal yang berperan dalam pembentukan hukum dan implementasi hukum di masyarakat. Oleh karena itu kedudukan dan relevansi penelitian sosio-legal pada ada tidaknya manfaat yang diberikan bagi perkembangan hukum nasional ataupun ilmu hukum.

Argument Complexity: Teaching Undergraduates to Make Better Arguments

Science.gov (United States)

Kelly, Matthew A.; West, Robert L.

2017-01-01

The task of turning undergrads into academics requires teaching them to reason about the world in a more complex way. We present the Argument Complexity Scale, a tool for analysing the complexity of argumentation, based on the Integrative Complexity and Conceptual Complexity Scales from, respectively, political psychology and personality theory.…

Attorney Argumentation and Supreme Court Opinions.

Science.gov (United States)

Benoit, William L.

1989-01-01

Investigates the relationship between argumentation advanced by attorneys in four Supreme Court cases and the reasoning proffered by the Court in its decisions in those cases. Finds attorney argumentation sometimes irrelevant to the Court's reasoning and sometimes adopted by the Court. Offers a perspective on argumentation and decision making to…

The Effectiveness of Reason Racer, a Game Designed to Engage Middle School Students in Scientific Argumentation

Science.gov (United States)

Ault, Marilyn; Craig-Hare, Jana; Frey, Bruce; Ellis, James D.; Bulgren, Janis

2015-01-01

Reason Racer is an online, rate-based, multiplayer game that applies specific game features in order to engage middle school students in introductory knowledge of and thinking related to scientific argumentation. Game features include rapid and competitive play, timed performance, immediate feedback, and high rates of response across many…

Written argument underlying the Brokdorf verdict

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Anon.

1980-01-01

In December 1979, the Schleswig administrative court delivered its judgment (AZ.: 10 A 512/76) against the plaintiffs (four neighbouring communities and nine individuals), who had brought in an action against the first part-construction permit for the Brokdorf nuclear power plant, issued on October 25, 1976. In mid-march 1980, the written argument underlying this court ruling (58 pages) has been sent out. The written argument conscientiously explains the reasoning of the court which delivered its verdict after several days of oral proceedings in October and November 1979, and clearly states the position of the court with regard to the limits of control by administrative jurisdiction as well as to the controversial legal problem of whether there is a lawful connection between the licensing in accordance with section 7, sub-section 2 of the AtG (Atomic Energy Act) and sufficient nuclear waste management provisions according to section 9a AtG. The court ruling declared the action to be substantially admissible but hot well-founded. (orig./HP) [de

Excess in Self-Defense and its Consequences to the Assesment of the Victim's Legal Crime Precipitation

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Diego José Dias Mendes

2016-10-01

Full Text Available This article explores the ongoing debate concerning excessive self-defense and its possible consequences to the assessment of victim legal precipitation of crimes. While part one introduces excess in its most accepted structure, part two describes theories that pursue the best reasons why the excess may, in certain cases, not be punished, focusing the ones who claim that those reasons relate to agressor’s self-responsibility, then applying their arguments to the evaluation of legal crime precipitation. It concludes that these theories can only hold by discriminating moral value of guilty and innocent victims, which is unacceptable.

Do medical students generate sound arguments during small group discussions in problem-based learning?: an analysis of preclinical medical students' argumentation according to a framework of hypothetico-deductive reasoning.

Science.gov (United States)

Ju, Hyunjung; Choi, Ikseon; Yoon, Bo Young

2017-06-01

Hypothetico-deductive reasoning (HDR) is an essential learning activity and a learning outcome in problem-based learning (PBL). It is important for medical students to engage in the HDR process through argumentation during their small group discussions in PBL. This study aimed to analyze the quality of preclinical medical students' argumentation according to each phase of HDR in PBL. Participants were 15 first-year preclinical students divided into two small groups. A set of three 2-hour discussion sessions from each of the two groups during a 1-week-long PBL unit on the cardiovascular system was audio-recorded. The arguments constructed by the students were analyzed using a coding scheme, which included four types of argumentation (Type 0: incomplete, Type 1: claim only, Type 2: claim with data, and Type 3: claim with data and warrant). The mean frequency of each type of argumentation according to each HDR phase across the two small groups was calculated. During small group discussions, Type 1 arguments were generated most often (frequency=120.5, 43%), whereas the least common were Type 3 arguments (frequency=24.5, 8.7%) among the four types of arguments. The results of this study revealed that the students predominantly made claims without proper justifications; they often omitted data for supporting their claims or did not provide warrants to connect the claims and data. The findings suggest instructional interventions to enhance the quality of medical students' arguments in PBL, including promoting students' comprehension of the structure of argumentation for HDR processes and questioning.

Healthy Reasoning: The Role of Effective Argumentation for Enhancing Elderly Patients' Self-management Abilities in Chronic Care.

Science.gov (United States)

Bigi, Sarah

2014-01-01

One of the biggest challenges for doctors working in chronic care is the correct management of the argumentation phases during the encounters with their patients. During these phases doctors should provide patients with acceptable reasons for being adherent to treatment and for changing certain unhealthy behaviors and lifestyles, something which is particularly difficult for elderly patients, for whom changing life long habits can be extremely hard. However, the medical literature on the subject of communication in the chronic care encounter shows lack of theoretical models and methodological approaches that can highlight which specific linguistic structures or elements in different communication styles favor or impede patient commitment, trust in the relationship and adherence to treatment. The contribution describes ongoing research on argumentative strategies in the encounter with diabetes patients. I describe one recently concluded research project on the argumentation phases of medical encounters in diabetes care, which highlighted critical areas in need of improvement. I also describe the design and aims of a new research project, aimed at testing the effectiveness and usability of certain argumentation schemes in the medical encounter.

Dialogical argumentation in elementary science classrooms

Science.gov (United States)

Kim, Mijung; Roth, Wolff-Michael

2018-02-01

To understand students' argumentation abilities, there have been practices that focus on counting and analyzing argumentation schemes such as claim, evidence, warrant, backing, and rebuttal. This analytic approach does not address the dynamics of epistemic criteria of children's reasoning and decision-making in dialogical situations. The common approach also does not address the practice of argumentation in lower elementary grades (K-3) because these children do not master the structure of argumentation and, therefore, are considered not ready for processing argumentative discourse. There is thus little research focusing on lower elementary school students' argumentation in school science. This study, drawing on the societal-historical approach by L. S. Vygotsky, explored children's argumentation as social relations by investigating the genesis of evidence-related practices (especially burden of proof) in second- and third-grade children. The findings show (a) students' capacity for connecting claim and evidence/responding to the burden of proof and critical move varies and (b) that teachers play a significant role to emphasize the importance of evidence but experience difficulties removing children's favored ideas during the turn taking of argumentative dialogue. The findings on the nature of dialogical reasoning and teacher's role provide further insights about discussions on pedagogical approaches to children's reasoning and argumentation.

Three Arguments for Lotteries

OpenAIRE

STONE, PETER

2010-01-01

PUBLISHED Philosophers and social scientists have offered a variety of arguments for making certain types of decisions by lot. This paper examines three such arguments. These arguments identify indeterminacy, fairness and incentive effects as the major reasons for using lotteries to make decisions. These arguments are central to Jon Elster?s study of lottery use, Solomonic judgments (1989), and so the paper focuses upon their treatment in this work. Upon closer examination, all three argum...

Peter Singer's argument for utilitarianism.

Science.gov (United States)

Buckle, Stephen

2005-01-01

The paper begins by situating Singer within the British meta-ethical tradition. It sets out the main steps in his argument for utilitarianism as the 'default setting' of ethical thought. It argues that Singer's argument depends on a hierarchy of reasons, such that the ethical viewpoint is understood to be an adaptation--an extension--of a fundamental self-interest. It concludes that the argument fails because it is impossible to get from this starting-point in self-interest to his conception of the ethical point of view. The fundamental problem is its mixing the immiscible: the Humean subordination of reason to interest with the Kantian conception of reason as universal and authoritative.

The demographic argument in Soviet debates over the legalization of abortion in the 1920s.

Science.gov (United States)

Solomon, S G

1993-01-01

Russia legalized abortion in 1920. State policy was pronatalist. Regional abortion commissions were established in order to monitor costs and maintain records. The physicians before the legal change were mainly against legalization. In 1923 the abortion rate was 2.91 abortions per live birth. A 1923 study by M. Karlin, M.D., found among 1362 women that the health risk to women of zero parity with an induced abortion was higher than giving birth. Public discussion of abortion was limited between 1921 and 1924. Russian physicians between 1925 and 1927 both publicly and privately discussed the problems; greater attention to demographic concerns occurred during the 1930s. The connection between abortion and the declining birth rate was established in a limited way in a May 1927 obstetricians' society meeting in Kiev, Ukraine. The albeit unreliable statistics appeared to confirm the decline in the birth rate due to increased numbers of abortions. The literature in the 1920s was devoted to the well-being of women as workers; abortion policy favored the interests of working women and was set up for prevention of unsafe illegal abortions. Russian demographers were more concerned with population movements. Surveys found that the profiled abortion client was indeed not destitute, but better off and married. Roesle, a German demographer, considered legal abortion beneficial in reducing maternal mortality, but he was criticized for obscuring abortions' impact on the birth rate. The debate in Russia was tangled in ideology. A comparison of abortion rates in Vienna and Moscow by a Viennese demographer Peller found similar rates regardless of legality. Peller further suggested that contraception had more to do with birth rates. Even though rural populations were hard hit by famine in 1931 and forced collectivization in 1929, increased rural abortions were blamed for the declining rural birth rates. The demographic argument against abortion became prominent again in 1931/32 after

Modeling non-monotonic properties under propositional argumentation

Science.gov (United States)

Wang, Geng; Lin, Zuoquan

2013-03-01

In the field of knowledge representation, argumentation is usually considered as an abstract framework for nonclassical logic. In this paper, however, we'd like to present a propositional argumentation framework, which can be used to closer simulate a real-world argumentation. We thereby argue that under a dialectical argumentation game, we can allow non-monotonic reasoning even under classical logic. We introduce two methods together for gaining nonmonotonicity, one by giving plausibility for arguments, the other by adding "exceptions" which is similar to defaults. Furthermore, we will give out an alternative definition for propositional argumentation using argumentative models, which is highly related to the previous reasoning method, but with a simple algorithm for calculation.

Towards an experimental account of argumentation: the case of the slippery slope and the ad hominem arguments

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Marco eLillo-Unglaube

2014-12-01

Full Text Available Argumentation is a crucial component of our lives. Although in the absence of rational debate our legal, political, and scientific systems would not be possible, there is still no integrated area of research on the psychology of argumentation. Furthermore, classical theories of argumentation are normative (i.e. the acceptability of an argument is determined by a set of norms or logical rules, which sometimes creates a dissociation between the theories and people’s behavior. We think the current challenge for psychology is to bring together the cognitive and normative accounts of argumentation. In this Perspective, we exemplify this point by analyzing two cases of argumentative structures experimentally studied in the context of cognitive psychology. Specifically, we focus on the slippery slope argument and the ad hominem argument under the frameworks of Bayesian and pragma-dialectics approaches, respectively. We think employing more descriptive and experimental accounts of argumentation would help Psychology to bring closer the cognitive and normative accounts of argumentation with the final goal of establishing an integrated area of research on the psychology of argumentation.

Toward an experimental account of argumentation: the case of the slippery slope and the ad hominem arguments.

Science.gov (United States)

Lillo-Unglaube, Marco; Canales-Johnson, Andrés; Navarrete, Gorka; Bravo, Claudio Fuentes

2014-01-01

Argumentation is a crucial component of our lives. Although in the absence of rational debate our legal, political, and scientific systems would not be possible, there is still no integrated area of research on the psychology of argumentation. Furthermore, classical theories of argumentation are normative (i.e., the acceptability of an argument is determined by a set of norms or logical rules), which sometimes creates a dissociation between the theories and people's behavior. We think the current challenge for psychology is to bring together the cognitive and normative accounts of argumentation. In this article, we exemplify this point by analyzing two cases of argumentative structures experimentally studied in the context of cognitive psychology. Specifically, we focus on the slippery slope argument and the ad hominem argument under the frameworks of Bayesian and pragma-dialectics approaches, respectively. We think employing more descriptive and experimental accounts of argumentation would help Psychology to bring closer the cognitive and normative accounts of argumentation with the final goal of establishing an integrated area of research on the psychology of argumentation.

Conductive Arguments: Why is This Still a Thing?

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Kevin Possin

2016-12-01

Full Text Available Conductive arguments, as a separate category of reasoning, has experienced a revival.  In 2010, the University of Windsor’s Centre for Research in Reasoning, Argumentation, and Rhetoric dedicated a two-day symposium to the topic and later published the proceedings.  In this article, I argue against the existence of conductive arguments as a usefully distinct type of argument.  Some of what are deemed conductive arguments are simply inductive arguments and some are best construed as subsets of the constituents of what is commonly called a position paper.

Indonesian legal framework to support innovation sustainability

Science.gov (United States)

Pratama, Bambang

2018-03-01

The successful economy in a country can be measured by the number of commercializing intellectual property rights (IPR). To pursue IPR growth, triple helix component becomes a backbone to weave academia, business and government to collaborate with each other. Generally, collaborations move from their common interest, but within triple helix the collaboration can be run structurally and sustain. Depart from the arguments; the question arises: How is the condition of Indonesia Innovation System? Through legal approach, this paper will explain current legal condition and legal structure of the Indonesian innovation system. The reason to review the law is to relate with the government’s target to create 1000 digital start-ups alike as in Silicon Valley level size. Therefore, legal framework review becomes useful to explain the condition of the law as a supporting system. In this sense, the legal prescription can be generated to confirm Indonesian laws, whether supported the national innovation system or conversely. Within law perspective, Indonesian government categorizes the innovative industry as a creative industry. However, there is still no resolute concept to follow. Therefore, some of law adjustment is needed to support the government’s plan to pursue commercialized innovation.

Fostering critical thinking, reasoning, and argumentation skills through bioethics education.

Science.gov (United States)

Chowning, Jeanne Ting; Griswold, Joan Carlton; Kovarik, Dina N; Collins, Laura J

2012-01-01

Developing a position on a socio-scientific issue and defending it using a well-reasoned justification involves complex cognitive skills that are challenging to both teach and assess. Our work centers on instructional strategies for fostering critical thinking skills in high school students using bioethical case studies, decision-making frameworks, and structured analysis tools to scaffold student argumentation. In this study, we examined the effects of our teacher professional development and curricular materials on the ability of high school students to analyze a bioethical case study and develop a strong position. We focused on student ability to identify an ethical question, consider stakeholders and their values, incorporate relevant scientific facts and content, address ethical principles, and consider the strengths and weaknesses of alternate solutions. 431 students and 12 teachers participated in a research study using teacher cohorts for comparison purposes. The first cohort received professional development and used the curriculum with their students; the second did not receive professional development until after their participation in the study and did not use the curriculum. In order to assess the acquisition of higher-order justification skills, students were asked to analyze a case study and develop a well-reasoned written position. We evaluated statements using a scoring rubric and found highly significant differences (p<0.001) between students exposed to the curriculum strategies and those who were not. Students also showed highly significant gains (p<0.001) in self-reported interest in science content, ability to analyze socio-scientific issues, awareness of ethical issues, ability to listen to and discuss viewpoints different from their own, and understanding of the relationship between science and society. Our results demonstrate that incorporating ethical dilemmas into the classroom is one strategy for increasing student motivation and

Fostering Critical Thinking, Reasoning, and Argumentation Skills through Bioethics Education

Science.gov (United States)

Chowning, Jeanne Ting; Griswold, Joan Carlton; Kovarik, Dina N.; Collins, Laura J.

2012-01-01

Developing a position on a socio-scientific issue and defending it using a well-reasoned justification involves complex cognitive skills that are challenging to both teach and assess. Our work centers on instructional strategies for fostering critical thinking skills in high school students using bioethical case studies, decision-making frameworks, and structured analysis tools to scaffold student argumentation. In this study, we examined the effects of our teacher professional development and curricular materials on the ability of high school students to analyze a bioethical case study and develop a strong position. We focused on student ability to identify an ethical question, consider stakeholders and their values, incorporate relevant scientific facts and content, address ethical principles, and consider the strengths and weaknesses of alternate solutions. 431 students and 12 teachers participated in a research study using teacher cohorts for comparison purposes. The first cohort received professional development and used the curriculum with their students; the second did not receive professional development until after their participation in the study and did not use the curriculum. In order to assess the acquisition of higher-order justification skills, students were asked to analyze a case study and develop a well-reasoned written position. We evaluated statements using a scoring rubric and found highly significant differences (p<0.001) between students exposed to the curriculum strategies and those who were not. Students also showed highly significant gains (p<0.001) in self-reported interest in science content, ability to analyze socio-scientific issues, awareness of ethical issues, ability to listen to and discuss viewpoints different from their own, and understanding of the relationship between science and society. Our results demonstrate that incorporating ethical dilemmas into the classroom is one strategy for increasing student motivation and

Fostering critical thinking, reasoning, and argumentation skills through bioethics education.

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Jeanne Ting Chowning

Full Text Available Developing a position on a socio-scientific issue and defending it using a well-reasoned justification involves complex cognitive skills that are challenging to both teach and assess. Our work centers on instructional strategies for fostering critical thinking skills in high school students using bioethical case studies, decision-making frameworks, and structured analysis tools to scaffold student argumentation. In this study, we examined the effects of our teacher professional development and curricular materials on the ability of high school students to analyze a bioethical case study and develop a strong position. We focused on student ability to identify an ethical question, consider stakeholders and their values, incorporate relevant scientific facts and content, address ethical principles, and consider the strengths and weaknesses of alternate solutions. 431 students and 12 teachers participated in a research study using teacher cohorts for comparison purposes. The first cohort received professional development and used the curriculum with their students; the second did not receive professional development until after their participation in the study and did not use the curriculum. In order to assess the acquisition of higher-order justification skills, students were asked to analyze a case study and develop a well-reasoned written position. We evaluated statements using a scoring rubric and found highly significant differences (p<0.001 between students exposed to the curriculum strategies and those who were not. Students also showed highly significant gains (p<0.001 in self-reported interest in science content, ability to analyze socio-scientific issues, awareness of ethical issues, ability to listen to and discuss viewpoints different from their own, and understanding of the relationship between science and society. Our results demonstrate that incorporating ethical dilemmas into the classroom is one strategy for increasing student

New Serbian criminal procedure: New reasons for harmonization with European legal standards

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Đurđić Vojislav

2014-01-01

Full Text Available The new criminal procedure, set forth in 2011, represents a compilation of the inquisitive model of preliminary proceedings, on the one hand, and adversarial trial of the Anglo-American type of criminal procedure on the other. Introduction of the public prosecutor's investigation required a subtle legislative approach to the protection of human rights in criminal proceedings, in order to establish equilibrium between efficient and just procedure. Instead of the expected, the erroneous conception based on the ideas that the public prosecutor's investigation should be strictly formal as that of a court, that evidence taken by the non-judicial authorities should have the same bearing as those taken by the courts, and that the court should have no role in conducting investigation, resulted in an overly inferior position of the accuses compared to that of the public prosecutor. Beside the fact that such conception can not pass the ECJ test, the specific legal solutions referring the investigation open the question of harmonization with the European legal standards. The provisions on initiation of this phase of the proceedings, not being legally sanctioned, put in question the right of the accused to access justice, as well as his right to an effective legal remedy, and the introduced investigation against the unknown perpetrator, the right to be present at one's own trial is being jeopardized. Neither do all procedural rules pertaining to the trial support the fair procedure principle: the indirect extortion of evidence from the defense is discordant with the rule that the burden of proof lies on the prosecutor, as one of the main pillars of the assumption of innocence; as well as the broad opportunity to use non-judicial evidence at the hearing without any major legal obstacles, have demolished the principles of directness and contradictoriness. Even some of the minimal right of the defense as well as the guarantees of personal freedom in the course

Argumentative Writing in Pre-Adolescents: The Role of Verbal Reasoning

Science.gov (United States)

Nippold, Marilyn A.; Ward-Lonergan, Jeannene M.

2010-01-01

Argumentative writing is a challenging communication task that calls upon sophisticated cognitive and linguistic abilities. Pre-adolescents (n = 80; mean age = 11;10; range = 10;6-13:5) were asked to write an argumentative essay on the controversial topic of training animals to perform in circuses. Additionally, they were asked to solve a set of…

The students’ mathematical argumentation in geometry

Science.gov (United States)

Sukirwan; Darhim; Herman, T.; Prahmana, R. C. I.

2017-12-01

The main objective of this research is to analyze the student's mathematical argumentation when dealing with geometry. The method is used qualitative method with grounded theory to know how the students provide an explanation or an answer against claims so that the quality of the vernacular students will be drawn up with clear from how students compose a series of arguments. The results showed that there were still many students basically experiencing constraints in argumentation, but the quality of the reasoning appears to be a variation of the argument appeared, include: inductive, algebra, visual and perceptual. In addition, the starting point of the students composes a series of arguments generally starts from claims that arise in a matter. Proof of claim further builds upon the relationship between the characteristics of data with mathematical objects that appear in the acquired mathematical knowledge from previous students. Relationship spelled out in a series of statements and reasons which support the claims through the fourth argument.

The Abuses of Argument: Understanding Fallacies on Toulmin’s Layout of Argument

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Andrew Pineau

2013-12-01

Full Text Available This paper provides a preliminary account of fallacies on Toulmin’s model of argument, one that improves upon previous attempts to understand fallacies on this argument scheme. To do this Johnson and Blair’s (1983 taxonomy of three basic fallacies (irrelevant reason, hasty conclusion and problematic premise is examined using Toulmin’s layout.

Modelling Imprecise Arguments in Description Logic

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

LETIA, I. A.

2009-10-01

Full Text Available Real arguments are a mixture of fuzzy linguistic variables and ontological knowledge. This paper focuses on modelling imprecise arguments in order to obtain a better interleaving of human and software agents argumentation, which might be proved useful for extending the number of real life argumentative-based applications. We propose Fuzzy Description Logic as the adequate technical instrumentation for filling the gap between human arguments and software agents arguments. A proof of concept scenario has been tested with the fuzzyDL reasoner.

Should Drugs Be Legalized?

Science.gov (United States)

Chambliss, William; Scorza, Thomas

1989-01-01

Presents two opposing viewpoints concerning the legalization of drugs. States that control efforts are not cost effective and suggests that legalization with efforts at education is a better course of action (W. Chambliss). The opposing argument contends that the cost in human suffering negates any savings in dollars gained through legalization…

Prudential Versus Probative Arguments for Religious Faith: Descartes and Pascal on Reason and Faith

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Dennis Sansom

2017-07-01

Full Text Available In this article, I show that Pascal’s prudential agenda, centered on the Wager, more successfully overcomes the restrictions of Pyrrhonic skepticism expressed by Montaigne than Descartes’ probative philosophy, which was based on his “ontological argument” for God’s existence. Descartes’ attempt to base natural science on the metaphysical certainty of a non-deceiving God fails because he cannot prove that a non-deceiving Perfect Being is a “clear and distinct” idea. Pascal’s attempt to base the knowledge of God upon the “reasons of the heart” accepts the epistemological restrictions of skepticism but provides a reason to develop passionate faith, thereby overcoming skepticism. I also show that Descartes and Pascal had different assumptions about the workings of the mind; Descartes relied on a model of the mind as a “theater,” which hindered his agenda, and Pascal upon a “holistic” model, which enabled him to make a prudential argument which was cognitively convincing.

Reconsidering Kantian arguments against organ selling.

Science.gov (United States)

Alpinar-Şencan, Zümrüt

2016-03-01

Referring to Kant's arguments addressing the moral relationship between our bodies and ourselves is quite common in contemporary debate about organ selling, although he does not provide us with any specific arguments related to this debate. It is widely argued that the most promising way to show the moral impermissibility of organ selling is to mount an argument on Kantian grounds. This paper asks whether it is possible to argue coherently against organ selling in a Kantian framework. It will be shown that by mounting the argument on Kantian grounds no compelling argument can be given against sale of organs, either because the arguments apply to donation of organs, too, or the arguments are not convincing for other independent reasons. In the first section, it will be argued that donation and selling are not distinguishable in a Kantian framework, since the concern about commodification of the body and its parts shall be raised by both actions. In the second section, some contemporary accounts inspired by Kant will be presented and discussed separately. It will be argued that the reasons for promoting organ donation while arguing against selling clash with each other in an unconvincing way.

From Inductive Reasoning to Proof

Science.gov (United States)

Yopp, David A.

2009-01-01

Mathematical proof is an expression of deductive reasoning (drawing conclusions from previous assertions). However, it is often inductive reasoning (conclusions drawn on the basis of examples) that helps learners form their deductive arguments, or proof. In addition, not all inductive arguments generate more formal arguments. This article draws a…

Reasoning with Previous Decisions: Beyond the Doctrine of Precedent

DEFF Research Database (Denmark)

Komárek, Jan

2013-01-01

in different jurisdictions use previous judicial decisions in their argument, we need to move beyond the concept of precedent to a wider notion, which would embrace practices and theories in legal systems outside the Common law tradition. This article presents the concept of ‘reasoning with previous decisions...... law method’, but they are no less rational and intellectually sophisticated. The reason for the rather conceited attitude of some comparatists is in the dominance of the common law paradigm of precedent and the accompanying ‘case law method’. If we want to understand how courts and lawyers......’ as such an alternative and develops its basic models. The article first points out several shortcomings inherent in limiting the inquiry into reasoning with previous decisions by the common law paradigm (1). On the basis of numerous examples provided in section (1), I will present two basic models of reasoning...

Between Democratic Security and Democratic Legality. Constitutional Politics and Presidential Re-election in Colombia

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Jan Boesten

2014-12-01

Full Text Available This paper presents an analysis of the political and legal debate of the declaration of unconstitutionality of the referendum that sought the re-election presidential second term in 2010. On the other hand, it exposes the debate between those who spoke of bias and political argument in the court ruling related to the idea of “democratic security”; while others speak of the persistence of “democratic legality” consisting of autonomy guaranteed legal reasoning from deliberative processes. Finally, it is noted that the degree of institutionalization of discourse of the Court is an important factor that speaks in favor of it’s independence.

The Ethics of Argumentation

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Vasco Correia

2012-06-01

Full Text Available Normative theories of argumentation tend to assume that logical and dialectical rules suffice to ensure the rationality of argumentative discourse. Yet, in everyday debates people use arguments that seem valid in light of such rules but nonetheless biased and tendentious. This article seeks to show that the rationality of argumentation can only be fully promoted if we take into account its ethical dimension. To substantiate this claim, I review some of the empirical evidence indicating that people’s inferential reasoning is systematically affected by a variety of biases and heuristics. Insofar as these cognitive illusions are typically unintentional, it appears that arguers may be biased despite their well-intended efforts to follow the rules of critical argumentation. Nevertheless, I argue that people remain responsible for the rationality of their arguments, given that there are a number of measures that they can (and ought to take to avoid such distortions. I highlight the importance of argumentational virtues and critical thinking to rational debates, and describe a set of indirect strategies of “argumentative self-control”.

One World? One Law? One Global Legal System? Modern Law and Socio-Legal Communities

OpenAIRE

Werner Krawietz

2014-01-01

In the present article the author considers the issues connected with globalization and structural changes in the contemporary societies. In author’s opinion, development of legal regulation encompasses not only the practical and theoretical argumentation in the law. It also includes the informative and communicative perspectives of our analytical and conceptual legal thinking and of our legal world-outlook which is formed accordingly to the social world of law. The author stresses that there...

Argumentative Bluff in Eristic Discussion : An Analysis and Evaluation

NARCIS (Netherlands)

van Laar, Jan Albert

How does the analysis and evaluation of argumentation depend on the dialogue type in which the argumentation has been put forward? This paper focuses on argumentative bluff in eristic discussion. Argumentation cannot be presented without conveying the pretence that it is dialectically reasonable, as

Modelling Scientific Argumentation in the Classroom : Teachers perception and practice

Science.gov (United States)

Probosari, R. M.; Sajidan; Suranto; Prayitno, B. A.; Widyastuti, F.

2017-02-01

The purposes of this study were to investigate teacher’s perception about scientific argumentation and how they practice it in their classroom. Thirty biology teachers in high school participated in this study and illustrated their perception of scientific argumentation through a questionnaire. This survey research was developed to measure teachers’ understanding of scientific argumentation, what they know about scientific argumentation, the differentiation between argument and reasoning, how they plan teaching strategies in order to make students’ scientific argumentation better and the obstacles in teaching scientific argumentation. The result conclude that generally, teachers modified various representation to accommodate student’s active participation, but most of them assume that argument and reasoning are similar. Less motivation, tools and limited science’s knowledge were considered as obstacles in teaching argumentation. The findings can be helpful to improving students’ abilities of doing scientific argumentation as a part of inquiry.

Van Inwagen on the Cosmological Argument | Brueckner ...

African Journals Online (AJOL)

In his book Metaphysics, Peter van Inwagen constructs a version of the Cosmological Argument which does not depend on the Principle of Sufficient Reason. He goes on to reject the argument. In this paper, I construct an alternative version of the Cosmological Argument that uses some of van Inwagen's insights and yet is ...

Methodology in Legal Research

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Tom R. Tyler

2017-12-01

Full Text Available Recent legal scholarship demonstrates increased attention to empirical research in the design and evaluation of law and the policies and practices of legal authorities. The growth of evidence informed law is an exciting development and one that promises to improve the legal system. In this paper I argue for the particular value of drawing not just upon empirical research methods when evaluating existing policies and practices but upon social science theories. Theory based research provides a basis for imagining and testing different models about how the legal system might operate. I support this argument by presenting research on social science frameworks for legal authority which are alternatives to the currently prevalent instrumental model.

Psychological and sociological research and the decriminalization or legalization of prostitution.

Science.gov (United States)

Rio, L M

1991-04-01

In maintaining criminal prohibitions on prostitution and prostitution-related activity, the United States has ignored the two alternative approaches successfully invoked in many other countries: legalization and decriminalization of prostitution. This article questions the justifications usually advanced in favor of criminal sanctions and against the two alternatives. Studies of prostitutes and their clients, as well as larger societal studies, undercut the arguments against decriminalization and legalization, and reveal that none of the traditional goals of imposing criminal sanctions (punishment, deterrence, and rehabilitation) are furthered by the current prohibition of prostitution. These studies also reveal the advantages offered by a system of decriminalized or legalized prostitution. Further policy arguments for the removal of such sanctions are discussed and legal arguments are offered to attempt to limit the reach of current criminal prostitution laws while the present system remains in effect.

Legitimization Arguments for Procedural Reforms: a semio-linguistic analysis of statement of reasons from the Civil Procedure Code of 1939 and of the draft bill of the New Civil Procedure Code of 2010.

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Matheus Guarino Sant’Anna Lima de Almeida

2016-08-01

Full Text Available This research aims to analyze the arguments of legitimization that were used in the reform of Brazilian procedural legal codes, by comparing the texts of the statement of reasons of the Civil Procedure Code of 1939 and the draft bill of the New Civil Procedure Code. We consider these codes as milestones: the Civil Procedure Code of 1939 was the first one with a national scope; the draft bill of the New Civil Procedure Code was the first one produced during a democratic period. Our goal is to search for similarities and contrasts between the legitimization arguments used in each historical and political period, by asking if they were only arguments to bestow legitimacy to such reforms. We decided to use the methodological tools of sociolinguistic analysis of speech developed by Patrick Charaudeau in his analyses of political speech in order to elucidate how the uses of language and elements of meaning in the speech construction provide justification for the concept of procedure, in both 1939 and 2010. As a result, we conclude that the process of drafting the CPC of 1939 and the New CPC, even if they are very distant in terms of political and historical contexts, they are also very close in their rhetorical construction and their attempt to find justification and adherence. On balance, some of the differences depend on the vocabulary used when the codes were developed, their justification and the need for change. 

Relations between inductive reasoning and deductive reasoning.

Science.gov (United States)

Heit, Evan; Rotello, Caren M

2010-05-01

One of the most important open questions in reasoning research is how inductive reasoning and deductive reasoning are related. In an effort to address this question, we applied methods and concepts from memory research. We used 2 experiments to examine the effects of logical validity and premise-conclusion similarity on evaluation of arguments. Experiment 1 showed 2 dissociations: For a common set of arguments, deduction judgments were more affected by validity, and induction judgments were more affected by similarity. Moreover, Experiment 2 showed that fast deduction judgments were like induction judgments-in terms of being more influenced by similarity and less influenced by validity, compared with slow deduction judgments. These novel results pose challenges for a 1-process account of reasoning and are interpreted in terms of a 2-process account of reasoning, which was implemented as a multidimensional signal detection model and applied to receiver operating characteristic data. PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved.

Generate an Argument: An Instructional Model

Science.gov (United States)

Sampson, Victor; Grooms, Jonathon

2010-01-01

The Generate an Argument instructional model was designed to engage students in scientific argumentation. By using this model, students develop complex reasoning and critical-thinking skills, understand the nature and development of scientific knowledge, and improve their communication skills (Duschl and Osborne 2002). This article describes the…

Relations between Inductive Reasoning and Deductive Reasoning

Science.gov (United States)

Heit, Evan; Rotello, Caren M.

2010-01-01

One of the most important open questions in reasoning research is how inductive reasoning and deductive reasoning are related. In an effort to address this question, we applied methods and concepts from memory research. We used 2 experiments to examine the effects of logical validity and premise-conclusion similarity on evaluation of arguments.…

[Evaluation of arguments in research reports].

Science.gov (United States)

Botes, A

1999-06-01

Some authors on research methodology are of opinion that research reports are based on the logic of reasoning and that such reports communicate with the reader by presenting logical, coherent arguments (Böhme, 1975:206; Mouton, 1996:69). This view implies that researchers draw specific conclusions and that such conclusions are justified by way of reasoning (Doppelt, 1998:105; Giere, 1984:26; Harre, 1965:11; Leherer & Wagner, 1983 & Pitt, 1988:7). The structure of a research report thus consists mainly of conclusions and reasons for such conclusions (Booth, Colomb & Williams, 1995:97). From this it appears that justification by means of reasoning is a standard procedure in research and research reports. Despite the fact that the logic of research is based on reasoning, that the justification of research findings by way of reasoning appears to be standard procedure and that the structure of a research report comprises arguments, the evaluation or assessment of research, as described in most textbooks on research methodology (Burns & Grove, 1993:647; Creswell, 1994:193; LoBiondo-Wood & Haber, 1994:441/481) does not focus on the arguments of research. The evaluation criteria for research reports which are set in these textbooks are related to the way in which the research process is carried out and focus on the measures for internal, external, theoretical, measurement and inferential validity. This means that criteria for the evaluation of research are comprehensive and they should be very specific in respect of each type of research (for example quantitative or qualitative). When the evaluation of research reports is focused on arguments and logic, there could probably be one set of universal standards against which all types of human science research reports can be assessed. Such a universal set of standards could possibly simplify the evaluation of research reports in the human sciences since they can be used to assess all the critical aspects of research reports

Legalization of drugs of abuse and the pediatrician.

Science.gov (United States)

Schwartz, R H

1991-10-01

Growing numbers of individuals are proposing that drugs be legalized in the United States, with claims that federal, state, and local efforts to prohibit the use of illicit drugs are irrational and unenforceable. "Drug reform" advocates include persons of all political persuasions. Ironically, the call for drug reform comes at a time when trends in drug abuse, as reflected in national and state surveys, show a promising decline. It also is contradictory to at least one recent public opinion poll, in which respondents opposed the legalization of marijuana by a five-to-one margin. While their position is by no means unanimous, proponents of drug reform generally base their arguments on several key premises, such as elimination of or reductions in drug trafficking, enforcement, and interdiction expenditures; increased tax revenues from the legal sale of drugs; and reductions in health-care expenses associated with drug treatment. Reform advocates further claim that legalization would not be followed by an increase in drug use. The validity of each of these arguments is highly questionable. Legalization is a simplistic, short-sighted solution to a complex issue with public health, economic, criminal justice, and societal ramifications. Legalization would, moreover, abrogate the position taken in 1961 by the United States and 114 other nations in ratifying the United Nations Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs. The impact of drug reform merits an unbiased study by an independent agency. Until that time, pediatricians should inform themselves of the arguments for and against drug reform and be prepared to educate patients and their families about the issue.

Synthetic Biology and the Argument from Continuity with Established Technologies

DEFF Research Database (Denmark)

Christiansen, Andreas

2015-01-01

) that it ignores the distinction between what reasons we have and what we should do all things considered. I then illustrate the Continuity Argument and its problems in the case where human manipulation of organisms’ genetic makeup is a suggested reason for finding synthetic biology problematic. Finally, I suggest......Defenders of synthetic biology commonly make reference to the fact that established technologies, such as domestication or selective breeding, share some of the features of synthetic biology that critics argue make it ethically problematic. In this chapter, I reconstruct such references...... as instances of a type of argument which I dub the Continuity Argument. Roughly, the Continuity Argument seeks to show that if we are not disposed to reject the established technology, then features that this technology share with synthetic biology cannot provide reasons to find it ethically problematic. I...

Formalising arguments about the burden of persuasion.

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Prakken, H.; Sartor, G.

2007-01-01

This paper presents an argument-based logic for reasoning about allocations of the burden of persuasion. The logic extends the system of Prakken (2001), which in turn modified the system of Prakken & Sartor (1996) with the possibility to distribute the burden of proof over both sides in an argument

The Connection and Distinction between the Design Argument with the Teleological Argument and the Best Creational System

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Farah Ramin

2011-09-01

Full Text Available The design argument faced with big different writings in its Western background so that these writings have essential difference with each others. The design argument is posteriori demonstration for the existence of God which by analogy or induction and partial or general instances of the order in nature tries to affirm the intelligent designer.  Since the concepts of design and end have firm connection with each other in the Western writings of this design but the concepts of purposiveness of divine acts, purposiveness of nature and its best system is assumed the same with each other and obvious confusion has been made between the design argument with the teleological argument and the best creational system. The aim of the article is to consider order in the world based upon the united components of a system (design argument, final cause (teleological argument and best system (best creational system argument and also to manifest the connection and distinction of these three reasoning. 

Socioscientific Argumentation: The effects of content knowledge and morality

Science.gov (United States)

Sadler, Troy D.; Donnelly, Lisa A.

2006-10-01

Broad support exists within the science education community for the incorporation of socioscientific issues (SSI) and argumentation in the science curriculum. This study investigates how content knowledge and morality contribute to the quality of SSI argumentation among high school students. We employed a mixed-methods approach: 56 participants completed tests of content knowledge and moral reasoning as well as interviews, related to SSI topics, which were scored based on a rubric for argumentation quality. Multiple regression analyses revealed no statistically significant relationships among content knowledge, moral reasoning, and argumentation quality. Qualitative analyses of the interview transcripts supported the quantitative results in that participants very infrequently revealed patterns of content knowledge application. However, most of the participants did perceive the SSI as moral problems. We propose a “Threshold Model of Knowledge Transfer” to account for the relationship between content knowledge and argumentation quality. Implications for science education are discussed.

[Euthanasia: legal comparison in selected European countries].

Science.gov (United States)

Doležal, Adam

2018-01-01

This article deals with the subject of euthanasia (all its forms) and other end-of-life decisions, such as assisted suicide, withdrawing and whithholding life-sustaining treatments. Among other things, the article will also deal with the issue of the offense of Homicide by the Victims Request. Based on an empirical historical method, the article compares the various selected legal orders. From this analysis, it draws some conclusions that have an impact on ethical discourse. First of all, the terminology is defined in the article, which is very important in this area. Further, German law is being analysed, with emphasis on Nazi Germany. On that basis, the so-called reductio ad Hitlerum argument is rejected. Research continues and is followed by another states, the Netherlands, Belgium and Switzerland. By analysing them, the following ethical arguments used in euthanasia debates are examined: the argument of a slippery slope and the argument of respect for autonomy. Finally, the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the Pretty case is also analysed. On this case, we can demonstrate, how insufficient is argument of human dignity. The last part is dedicated to the Czech Republic and its legal order. Firstly, it focuses on the history of the legal regulation of euthanasia, but the main part deals with the current legal situation. In addition to the recent state of affairs, the bill of Death with dignity act is also being examined. At the end of the article it is pointed out that the Czech regulation is insufficient and changes are necessary. However, the proposed bill of Death with dignity act is not the right way to follow. Rather, it may be wise to adopt an amendment to the Penal Code that would introduce the offense of Homicide by the Victims Request.Key words: assisted suicide - euthanasia - Homicide by the Victims Request - medical futility - withdrawing and whithholding life-sustaining treatment.

Argumentation and Inference: A Unified Approach

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Christophe Fouqueré

2013-12-01

Full Text Available We propose in this paper to use Ludics as a unified framework for the analysis of dialogue and the reasoning system. Not only is Ludics a logical theory, but it may also be built by means of concepts of game theory. We first present the main concepts of Ludics. A design is an abstraction and a generalization of the concept of proof. Interaction between designs is equivalent to cut elimination or modus ponens in logical theories. It appears to be a natural means for representing dialogues and also for reasoning. A design is a set of sequences of alternate actions, similar to a move in game theory. We apply Ludics to argumentative dialogues. We discuss how to model the speech acts of argumentative dialogues in terms of dialogue acts. A dialogue act is given by a Ludics action together with the expression that reveals the action in a turn of speech. We show also how arguments may be stored in a commitment state used for reasoning. Finally we revisit an example of juridical dialogue that has been analyzed by Prakken in a different framework.

A sense of self-suspicion: global legal pluralism and the claim to legal authority

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Mariano Croce

2015-03-01

Full Text Available Legal pluralism has become common currency in many contemporary debates on law and globalization. Its main claim is that a form of global legal pluralism represents both the most accurate description of law in times of globalization and the best normative option. On the descriptive level, global legal pluralism is considered more reliable than state-based accounts. On the normative level, global legal pluralism is understood as a possibility to open up the legal realm to previously unheard voices. This article assesses these claims against the background of classic legal-pluralist scholarship. After reconstructing the emergence of global legal pluralism and then examining its epistemic and normative versions, the last two sections identify the shortcoming of this approach by underlining the absence of what the authors call ‘a sense of self-suspicion’ in drawing the map of legalities in the global sphere. The main argument put forward is that global legal pluralism is oblivious of a few key insights offered by the founding fathers of classic legal pluralism.

INTERDISCIPLINARY SYSTEMIC JURIDICAL ARGUMENTATION: A NEW WAY TO JUSTIFY EMPHATICALLY AND EFFECTIVELLY

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Jorge Isaac Torres Manrique

2018-04-01

Full Text Available The article discusses the interdisciplinary systemic juridical argumentation. We propose to elevate the legal argumentation to a complete and integral level. That is, to provide a kind of tool that facilitates and ensures a full and complete analysis and foundation, in order to achieve a due as expected justice administration, in justice proper.

A Comparative Study of Argument from Primordial Nature and Argument from General Consensus on the Demonstration of Existence of God

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Hamidreza Abdoli Mehrjardi

2014-08-01

devoted this essay to the key views developed regarding these arguments.    When we put together different expositions of the argument from primordial nature and the argument from general consensus we reach to a general principle which constitutes the foundation of both arguments; i.e. the existence of a common sense in all human individuals in all times and places. To put it differently, both argument are founded on the idea that there is an inborn disposition in man which pushes him/her toward the Supreme and this disposition has existed in all times and places. But when we analyze the theories one by one we become aware of the slightest differences and similarities.    It seems that the second type biological expositions are nearer to the exposition of argument from primordial nature based on correlation. We mean those expositions which regard the generality of belief in God an indication of a primordial disposition toward God. The first type of expositions which interpret the enthusiasm for God in terms of instinctual needs cannot be an indication of primordial nature; since primordial nature is an exclusive faculty of humanity. Of course it is also noteworthy that the primordial nature to which the argument from the general consensus refers is a potentiality which needs to be actualized while Islamic thought suggests that primordial nature exists in all human individuals in a fulfilled form even if it is neglected now and then.    As to anti-skepticistic expositions we have to say that this exposition has one premise to the effect that all human beings who believe in God have accepted his existence in a rational way; particularly James Joyce who is the main proponent of this exposition believes that all human beings are open to their creator due to the decisive and clear call of reason. Thus it seems that this exposition of the argument from general consensus is similar to the third form of the argument from primordial nature; since in both the infallibility of

Themes and Interplay of Beliefs in Mathematical Reasoning

Science.gov (United States)

Sumpter, Lovisa

2013-01-01

Upper secondary students' task solving reasoning was analysed with a focus on arguments for strategy choices and conclusions. Passages in their arguments for reasoning that indicated the students' beliefs were identified and, by using a thematic analysis, categorized. The results stress three themes of beliefs used as arguments for…

Analyzing Argumentation In Rich, Natural Contexts

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Anita Reznitskaya

2008-02-01

Full Text Available The paper presents the theoretical and methodological aspects of research on the development of argument- ation in elementary school children. It presents a theoretical framework detailing psychological mechanisms responsible for the acquisition and transfer of argumentative discourse and demonstrates several applications of the framework, described in sufficient detail to guide future empirical investigations of oral, written, individual, or group argumentation performance. Software programs capable of facilitating data analysis are identified and their uses illustrated. The analytic schemes can be used to analyze large amounts of verbal data with reasonable precision and efficiency. The conclusion addresses more generally the challenges for and possibilities of empirical study of the development of argumentation.

Institutional Boundaries on the Evaluation of Argumentation in Legislative Discussions

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Plug, H.J.

2010-01-01

In order to be able to evaluate argumentation supporting judicial decisions, certain norms of reasonableness will have to be agreed upon. These norms will enable us to decide on the soundness of the argumentation. Various publications demonstrated that the pragma-dialectical argumentation theory, in

Argumentation and Decision Making in Professional Practice

Science.gov (United States)

Gainsburg, Julie; Fox, John; Solan, Lawrence M.

2016-01-01

How is argumentation used in professional practice? As schools aim to ensure that students are college-and-career ready, classroom practices might be informed by argumentation in the professions. An analysis of evidence-based reasoning in 3 professions--engineering, law, and medicine--offers out-of-school perspectives on the practices and purposes…

Revisiting Strawsonian Arguments from Inescapability

OpenAIRE

Szigeti, Andras

2012-01-01

Peter Strawson defends the thesis that determinism is irrelevant to the justifiability of responsibility-attributions. In this paper, I want to examine various arguments advanced by Strawson in support of this thesis. These arguments all draw on the thought that the practice of responsibility is inescapable. My main focus is not so much the metaphysical details of Strawsonian compatibilism, but rather the more fundamental idea that x being inescapable may be reason for us to regard x as justi...

["Reasonable cause"--an undefined legal term for the justification of the killing of equids].

Science.gov (United States)

Deegen, E

2008-03-01

Killing of a vertebrate animal in Germany is allowed or not punishable only if a "reasonable cause" can be identified (Article 17 No. 1 TierSchG). A legal definition of the term "reasonable cause" does not exist. Currently the following definitions of the "reasonable cause" for the killing of equids are accepted: 1. Slaughter (in accordance with the equid pass and waiting periods) reasonable cause: Food production, initiated by the owner's desire. The requirements for slaughter of a sick animal or an emergency slaughter are defined through EU-legislations. 2. Euthanasia (in its original meaning) Reasonable cause: a) Compassion, initiated through medical indication b) scientific purposes (experimental animals) initiated through governmental authorization of a research request c) Epidemiological reasons initiated through veterinary legislative measures. According to the law for the protection of animals (TierSchG) "non curable pain or suffering" is a prerequisite for the killing of an animal because of a medical indication. Presuming an adequate knowledge base of the veterinarian this should leave enough room for an adequate medically reasoned decision. However, both a faulty veterinary explanation of a reasonable cause and an undue delay of the euthanasia (follow Article 17) can lead to an illegal punishable act (severe pain or suffering). Examples of veterinary medical indications for euthanasia will be presented. In addition, the question whether euthanasia can be considered as an alternative to treatment will be discussed. Finally, the more restrictive interpretations of the "reasonable cause" put forth by insurance companies will be explained. Future higher court decisions should lead to an adaptation of the insurance companies' interpretations of the "reasonable cause" to the outline presented above.

International Law as an Argumentative Practice: On Wohlrapp’s Concept of Argument

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Venzke, I.

2016-01-01

It has become a commonplace to view international law as an argumentative practice. This commonplace, it is argued, clouds strong differences that re-emerge with closer scrutiny. What, specifically, is the place of reason, rhetoric or violence in the practice of arguing? The present article explores

How People Reason: A Grounded Theory Study of Scientific Reasoning about Global Climate Change

Science.gov (United States)

Liu, Shiyu

Scientific reasoning is crucial in both scientific inquiry and everyday life. While the majority of researchers have studied "how people reason" by focusing on their cognitive processes, factors related to the underpinnings of scientific reasoning are still under-researched. The present study aimed to develop a grounded theory that captures not only the cognitive processes during reasoning but also their underpinnings. In particular, the grounded theory and phenomenographic methodologies were integrated to explore how undergraduate students reason about competing theories and evidence on global climate change. Twenty-six undergraduate students were recruited through theoretical sampling. Constant comparative analysis of responses from interviews and written assessments revealed that participants were mostly drawn to the surface features when reasoning about evidence. While prior knowledge might not directly contribute to participants' performance on evidence evaluation, it affected their level of engagement when reading and evaluating competing arguments on climate issues. More importantly, even though all participants acknowledged the relative correctness of multiple perspectives, they predominantly favored arguments that supported their own beliefs with weak scientific reasoning about the opposing arguments. Additionally, factors such as personal interests, religious beliefs, and reading capacity were also found to have bearings on the way participants evaluated evidence and arguments. In all, this work contributes to the current endeavors in exploring the nature of scientific reasoning. Taking a holistic perspective, it provides an in-depth discussion of factors that may affect or relate to scientific reasoning processes. Furthermore, in comparison with traditional methods used in the literature, the methodological approach employed in this work brought an innovative insight into the investigation of scientific reasoning. Last but not least, this research may

Age differences in attitude change: influences of cognitive resources and motivation on responses to argument quantity.

Science.gov (United States)

Wang, Mo; Chen, Yiwei

2006-09-01

This study examined the influences of cognitive resources and motivation on how young and older adults process different quantities of persuasive arguments. In the first experiment session, both young and older adults rated their attitudes toward marijuana legalization and capital punishment. After a week, they read either 3 or 9 similar-quality arguments supporting marijuana legalization and capital punishment. Half of participants were assigned to the high-involvement condition (i.e., told that they were going to discuss the arguments later with the experimenter) and the other half were assigned to the low-involvement condition (i.e., given no instructions). After reading the arguments, participants rated their attitudes toward those 2 social issues again. Highly involved young adults changed their attitudes regardless of the quantity of arguments, whereas lowly involved young adults' attitude change was influenced by the argument quantity. Older adults in both high-involvement and low-involvement conditions changed their attitudes according to the argument quantity. Working memory was found to mediate the age effects on attitude change. This finding demonstrated the importance of a cognitive mechanism in accounting for age differences in attitude change.

Understanding and Detecting Supporting Arguments of Diverse Types

OpenAIRE

Hua, Xinyu; Wang, Lu

2017-01-01

We investigate the problem of sentence-level supporting argument detection from relevant documents for user-specified claims. A dataset containing claims and associated citation articles is collected from online debate website idebate.org. We then manually label sentence-level supporting arguments from the documents along with their types as study, factual, opinion, or reasoning. We further characterize arguments of different types, and explore whether leveraging type information can facilita...

The principle of procreative beneficence: old arguments and a new challenge.

Science.gov (United States)

Hotke, Andrew

2014-06-01

In the last ten years, there have been a number of attempts to refute Julian Savulescu's Principle of Procreative Beneficence; a principle which claims that parents have a moral obligation to have the best child that they can possibly have. So far, no arguments against this principle have succeeded at refuting it. This paper tries to explain the shortcomings of some of the more notable arguments against this principle. I attempt to break down the argument for the principle and in doing so, I explain what is needed to properly refute it. This helps me show how and why the arguments of Rebecca Bennett, Sarah Stoller and others fail to refute the principle. Afterwards, I offer a new challenge to the principle. I attack what I understand to be a fundamental premise of the argument, a premise which has been overlooked in the literature written about this principle. I argue that there is no reason to suppose, as Savulescu does, that morality requires us to do what we have most reason to do. If we reject this premise, as I believe we have reason to do, the argument for Procreative Beneficence fails. © 2012 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Argument from Design in Richard Baxter's Natural Theology

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Igor Koshelev

2017-12-01

Full Text Available The article deals with the teleological argument, or argument from design, as expounded by a famous English Protestant theologian Richard Baxter, one of the leading 17-th century English Puritans, in his work “The Reasons of the Christian Religion”. Natural theology, providing arguments for the existence of God based on reason and without appeal to the Revelation, has always played a vital role throughout the entire history of theological thought. The most popular was the so called teleological argument, or the argument from design, which stands out among all rational arguments for the existence of the Creator. It is mostly known from the “Fifth Way” of the medieval Scholastic philosopher Thomas Aquinas and a famous work “Natural Theology” by an English 19-th century theologian William Paley. The foundation for the modern research in the area was laid during the age of the Scientific Revolution of the 17th century English nature philosophers and theologians, especially Robert Boyle, who believed the teleological argument to be the key element of Natural Theology. His friend and confessor, Richard Baxter, a prominent representative of the Puritan Natural Theology, mostly known by his theological works, paved the way for Natural Theology both in his own time and the following centuries. His work was thought to be the best collection of the evidences for Christianity.

Law-based arguments and messages to advocate for later school start time policies in the United States.

Science.gov (United States)

Lee, Clark J; Nolan, Dennis M; Lockley, Steven W; Pattison, Brent

2017-12-01

The increasing scientific evidence that early school start times are harmful to the health and safety of teenagers has generated much recent debate about changing school start times policies for adolescent students. Although efforts to promote and implement such changes have proliferated in the United States in recent years, they have rarely been supported by law-based arguments and messages that leverage the existing legal infrastructure regulating public education and child welfare in the United States. Furthermore, the legal bases to support or resist such changes have not been explored in detail to date. This article provides an overview of how law-based arguments and messages can be constructed and applied to advocate for later school start time policies in US public secondary schools. The legal infrastructure impacting school start time policies in the United States is briefly reviewed, including descriptions of how government regulates education, what legal obligations school officials have concerning their students' welfare, and what laws and public policies currently exist that address adolescent sleep health and safety. On the basis of this legal infrastructure, some hypothetical examples of law-based arguments and messages that could be applied to various types of advocacy activities (eg, litigation, legislative and administrative advocacy, media and public outreach) to promote later school start times are discussed. Particular consideration is given to hypothetical arguments and messages aimed at emphasizing the consistency of later school start time policies with existing child welfare law and practices, legal responsibilities of school officials and governmental authorities, and societal values and norms. Copyright © 2017 National Sleep Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Argumentative Bluff in Eristic Discussion: An Analysis and Evaluation

OpenAIRE

van Laar, Jan Albert

2010-01-01

How does the analysis and evaluation of argumentation depend on the dialogue type in which the argumentation has been put forward? This paper focuses on argumentative bluff in eristic discussion. Argumentation cannot be presented without conveying the pretence that it is dialectically reasonable, as well as, at least to some degree, rhetorically effective. Within eristic discussion it can be profitable to engage in bluff with respect to such claims. However, it will be argued that such bluffi...

Causal reasoning in physics

CERN Document Server

Frisch, Mathias

2014-01-01

Much has been written on the role of causal notions and causal reasoning in the so-called 'special sciences' and in common sense. But does causal reasoning also play a role in physics? Mathias Frisch argues that, contrary to what influential philosophical arguments purport to show, the answer is yes. Time-asymmetric causal structures are as integral a part of the representational toolkit of physics as a theory's dynamical equations. Frisch develops his argument partly through a critique of anti-causal arguments and partly through a detailed examination of actual examples of causal notions in physics, including causal principles invoked in linear response theory and in representations of radiation phenomena. Offering a new perspective on the nature of scientific theories and causal reasoning, this book will be of interest to professional philosophers, graduate students, and anyone interested in the role of causal thinking in science.

Teisinio argumentavimo korektiškumo prielaidos

OpenAIRE

Mackuvienė, Eglė

2011-01-01

A phenomenon called legal argumentation is analyzed in the dissertation. The aim of the thesis is to identify the prerequisites that allow to consider the legal argumentation to be correct, also to evaluate those prerequisites logically. Legal argumentation is analyzed as a phenomenon per se, without relating it to any particular arguing subject. Other dimensions of the process of making a legal decision, such as legal reasoning, legal discourse, interpretation of law and others are discu...

Children's reasoning with peers in cooperative and competitive contexts.

Science.gov (United States)

Domberg, Andreas; Köymen, Bahar; Tomasello, Michael

2018-03-01

We report two studies that demonstrate how five- and seven-year-olds adapt their production of arguments to either a cooperative or a competitive context. Two games elicited agreements from peer dyads about placing animals on either of two halves of a playing field owned by either child. Children had to produce arguments to justify these decisions. Played in a competitive context that encouraged placing animals on one's own half, children's arguments showed a bias that was the result of withholding known arguments. In a cooperative context, children produced not only more arguments, but also more 'two-sided' arguments. Also, seven-year-olds demonstrated a more frequent and strategic use of arguments that specifically refuted decisions that would favour their peers. The results suggest that cooperative contexts provide a more motivating context for children to produce arguments. Statement of contribution What is already known on this subject? Reasoning is a social skill that allows people to reach joint decisions. Preschoolers give reasons for their proposals in their peer conversations. By adolescence, children use sophisticated arguments (e.g., refutations and rebuttals). What the present study adds? Cooperation offers a more motivating context for children's argument production. Seven-year-olds are more strategic than five-year-olds in their reasoning with peers. Children's reasoning with others becomes more sophisticated after preschool years. © 2017 The British Psychological Society.

The exploitation argument against commercial surrogacy.

Science.gov (United States)

Wilkinson, Stephen

2003-04-01

This paper discusses the exploitation argument against commercial surrogacy: the claim that commercial surrogacy is morally objectionable because it is exploitative. The following questions are addressed. First, what exactly does the exploitation argument amount to? Second, is commercial surrogacy in fact exploitative? Third, if it were exploitative, would this provide a sufficient reason to prohibit (or otherwise legislatively discourage) it? The focus throughout is on the exploitation of paid surrogates, although it is noted that other parties (e.g. 'commissioning parents') may also be the victims of exploitation. It is argued that there are good reasons for believing that commercial surrogacy is often exploitative. However, even if we accept this, the exploitation argument for prohibiting (or otherwise legislatively discouraging) commercial surrogacy remains quite weak. One reason for this is that prohibition may well 'backfire' and lead to potential surrogates having to do other things that are more exploitative and/or more harmful than paid surrogacy. It is concluded therefore that those who oppose exploitation should (rather than attempting to stop particular practices like commercial surrogacy) concentrate on: (a) improving the conditions under which paid surrogates 'work'; and (b) changing the background conditions (in particular, the unequal distribution of power and wealth) which generate exploitative relationships.

The Illusion of Argument Justification

Science.gov (United States)

Fisher, Matthew; Keil, Frank

2013-01-01

Argumentation is an important way to reach new understanding. Strongly caring about an issue, which is often evident when dealing with controversial issues, has been shown to lead to biases in argumentation. We suggest that people are not well calibrated in assessing their ability to justify a position through argumentation, an effect we call the illusion of argument justification. Furthermore we find that caring about the issue further clouds this introspection. We first show this illusion by measuring the difference between ratings before and after producing an argument for one’s own position. The strength of the illusion is predicted by the strength of care for a given issue (Study 1). The tacit influences of framing and priming do not override the effects of emotional investment in a topic (Study 2). However, explicitly considering counterarguments removes the effect of care when initially assessing the ability to justify a position (Study 3). Finally, we consider our findings in light of other recent research and discuss the potential benefits of group reasoning. PMID:23506085

An Argumentation-Based Approach to Normative Practical Reasoning

OpenAIRE

Shams, Zohreh

2015-01-01

Autonomous agents operating in a dynamic environment must be able to reason about their actions in pursuit of their goals. An additional consideration for such agents is that their actions may be constrained by norms that aim at defining an acceptable behaviour for the agents. The inclusion of normative reasoning into practical reasoning is derived from the necessity for effective mechanisms that regulate an agent’s behaviour in an open environment without compromising their autonomy. However...

STUDYING PRESCHOOL CHILDREN’S REASONING THROUGH EPISTEMOLOGICAL MOVE ANALYSIS

OpenAIRE

Sumpter, Lovisa; Hedefalk, Maria

2017-01-01

In this paper, we propose a theoretical tool for analysing mathematical reasoning using Epistemological Move Analysis (EMA) in combination with a framework focusing on arguments and the foundation of these. We also suggest the addition of evaluative arguments when talking about different types of arguments besides predictive and verifying arguments. The tool was applied on data of preschool children’s mathematical reasoning. The results indicate that different types of epistemological moves a...

Memory, Critical Theory and the Argument from History.

Science.gov (United States)

Cox, J. Robert

1990-01-01

Explores the function of memory in critical theory, particularly in the work of Herbert Marcuse, as the basis for a critical argumentation. Argues that Marcuse's view suggests that argument is a "re-membering" of what had been split asunder--reason, imagination, and the capacity of action. Discusses other implications of Marcuse's…

Two kinds of reasoning.

Science.gov (United States)

Rips, L J

2001-03-01

According to one view of reasoning, people can evaluate arguments in at least two qualitatively different ways: in terms of their deductive correctness and in terms of their inductive strength. According to a second view, assessments of both correctness and strength are a function of an argument's position on a single psychological continuum (e.g., subjective conditional probability). A deductively correct argument is one with the maximum value on this continuum; a strong argument is one with a high value. The present experiment tested these theories by asking participants to evaluate the same set of arguments for correctness and strength. The results produced an interaction between type of argument and instructions: In some conditions, participants judged one argument deductively correct more often than a second, but judged the second argument inductively strong more often than the first. This finding supports the view that people have distinct ways to evaluate arguments.

A Framework for Argumentation-Based Negotiation

OpenAIRE

Sierra, C.; Jennings, N. R.; Noriega, P.; Parsons, S.

1997-01-01

Many autonomous agents operate in domains in which the cooperation of their fellow agents cannot be guaranteed. In such domains negotiation is essential to persuade others of the value of co-operation. This paper describes a general framework for negotiation in which agents exchange proposals backed by arguments which summarise the reasons why the proposals should be accepted.The argumentation is persuasive because the exchanges are able to alter the mental state of the agents involved. The f...

How arguments are justified in the media debate on climate change in the USA and France

OpenAIRE

Ylä-Anttila, Tuomas; Kukkonen, Anna

2014-01-01

This paper examines the differences in the values that are evoked to justify arguments in the media debate on climate change in USA and France from 1997 to 2011. We find that climate change is more often discussed in terms of justice, democracy, and legal regulation in France, while monetary value plays a more important role as a justification for climate policy arguments in the USA. Technological and scientific arguments are more often made in France, and ecological arguments equally in both...

Labour law and communitarian legal standards

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Jašarević Senad

2014-01-01

Full Text Available The recently adopted amendments to the Labour Code was accompanied by an extremely high resistance. While opponents consider amendments to the Law a big step back and point out that it is completely contrary to the standards of the International Labor Organization, advocates of the changes have emphasized the progressiveness. The most important argument to them was that the Code represents a substantial harmonization of our legislation with the advanced standards of EU law. Much of what have excelled both advocates and opponents of legal change is not actually correct. The main reason for the erroneous views was lack of knowledge of comparative and international labor standards. The law on the one hand is a step backwards when it comes to the protection of workers. On the other hand, it is a step forward it is a reform of the system of labor relations that was necessary and was forced by the international environment, from which our country in the era of globalization can not be excluded. Amendments to the Labour Code we see as a tendency to be in Serbia finally to establish a similar legal environment in the domain of work, as in the advanced countries of Western Europe.

La modalité au service de l’argumentation

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Alexandra Cuniță

2016-12-01

Full Text Available Communication sometimes consists for the speaker of putting forward an endorsed opinion in a given situation and in attempting to provide the audience with the best reasons in order for them to concur with this opinion, while granting them the liberty of espousing or not the thesis in question at the end of the reasoning. In other words, the subject that the speaker is going to debate, a subject which falls within the whole set of ideas and opinions shared by his/her possible or real interlocutors at the moment Ti will take the form of an argumentation. A special relationship is established between the speaker and the message recipient, as well as between the former – also called argument providing subject (‘sujet argumentant’ by certain researchers – and his/her words, of whose validity he/she must convince the latter, the target audience. In order for the argumentation to succeed, the speaker must carefully mark his/her position regarding the words he/she employs, as well as regarding the value of the arguments mobilized. It is precisely on these levels that the importance of modality becomes manifest, thus contributing to the success of argument phrasing (‘mise en argumentation’. How can modality prove useful for argument phrasing? On what levels is it involved in the process of argumentation and how is it achieved? Such is the subject we attempt to develop starting from a message of a particular type: a revealing fragment, in our opinion, taken from a literary text.

Targeted killing with drones? Old arguments, new technologies

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Meisels Tamar

2018-01-01

Full Text Available The question of how to contend with terrorism in keeping with our preexisting moral and legal commitments now challenges Europe as well as Israel and the United States: how do we apply Just War Theory and International Law to asymmetrical warfare, specifically to our counter terrorism measures? What can the classic moral argument in Just and Unjust Wars teach us about contemporary targeted killings with drones? I begin with a defense of targeted killing, arguing for the advantages of pin pointed attacks over any alternative measure available for combatting terrorism. Assuming the legitimacy of killing combatants in wartime, I argue, there is nothing wrong, and in fact much that is right, with targeting particular terrorists selected by name, as long as their assassinations can be reasonably expected to reduce terrorist hostilities rather than increase it. Subsequently, I offer some further thoughts and comments on the use of remotely piloted aircrafts to carry out targeted killings, and address the various sources for discomfort with this practice identified by Michael Walzer and others.

Semiotic and Theoretic Control in Argumentation and Proof Activities

Science.gov (United States)

Arzarello, Ferdinando; Sabena, Cristina

2011-01-01

We present a model to analyze the students' activities of argumentation and proof in the graphical context of Elementary Calculus. The theoretical background is provided by the integration of Toulmin's structural description of arguments, Peirce's notions of sign, diagrammatic reasoning and abduction, and Habermas' model for rational behavior.…

The argument of the principles in contemporary theory of law: An antipositivist plea

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

José Julián Suárez-Rodríguez

2012-06-01

Full Text Available The theory of legal principles knows today a resonance unknown in other times of legal science and several authors have dedicated themselves to its formation, each of them giving important elements in its configuration. This article presents the characteristics of the contemporary theory of the principles and the contributions that the most important authors in the field gave to it. Furthermore, it shows how the theory of principles has been developed as an argument against the main thesis of legal positivism, the dominant legal culture until the second half of the twentieth century.

Argudas: lessons for argumentation in biology based on a gene expression use case

OpenAIRE

McLeod, Kenneth; Ferguson, Gus; Burger, Albert

2012-01-01

Background In situ hybridisation gene expression information helps biologists identify where a gene is expressed. However, the databases that republish the experimental information online are often both incomplete and inconsistent. Non-monotonic reasoning can help resolve such difficulties - one such form of reasoning is computational argumentation. Essentially this involves asking a computer to debate (i.e. reason about) the validity of a particular statement. Arguments are produced for both...

Using Computer-Assisted Argumentation Mapping to develop effective argumentation skills in high school advanced placement physics

Science.gov (United States)

Heglund, Brian

Educators recognize the importance of reasoning ability for development of critical thinking skills, conceptual change, metacognition, and participation in 21st century society. There is a recognized need for students to improve their skills of argumentation, however, argumentation is not explicitly taught outside logic and philosophy---subjects that are not part of the K-12 curriculum. One potential way of supporting the development of argumentation skills in the K-12 context is through incorporating Computer-Assisted Argument Mapping to evaluate arguments. This quasi-experimental study tested the effects of such argument mapping software and was informed by the following two research questions: 1. To what extent does the collaborative use of Computer-Assisted Argumentation Mapping to evaluate competing theories influence the critical thinking skill of argument evaluation, metacognitive awareness, and conceptual knowledge acquisition in high school Advanced Placement physics, compared to the more traditional method of text tables that does not employ Computer-Assisted Argumentation Mapping? 2. What are the student perceptions of the pros and cons of argument evaluation in the high school Advanced Placement physics environment? This study examined changes in critical thinking skills, including argumentation evaluation skills, as well as metacognitive awareness and conceptual knowledge, in two groups: a treatment group using Computer-Assisted Argumentation Mapping to evaluate physics arguments, and a comparison group using text tables to evaluate physics arguments. Quantitative and qualitative methods for collecting and analyzing data were used to answer the research questions. Quantitative data indicated no significant difference between the experimental groups, and qualitative data suggested students perceived pros and cons of argument evaluation in the high school Advanced Placement physics environment, such as self-reported sense of improvement in argument

The South African Constitutional Court Experience: Reasoning Patterns Based on Foreign Law

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Andrea Lollini

2012-05-01

Full Text Available This article aims to analyse the phenomenon of the diffusion of interpretive paradigms or argumentation models between constitutional courts. This phenomenon involves the importation of parameters - defined here as extra-systemic to a specific legal system - and the use of the comparative method in applying constitutional texts.The main subject of this study is the analysis of the first 11 years of South African constitutional jurisprudence, which is a convenient scenario since a constitutional provision enables the Constitutional Court to 'consider foreign law' when interpreting the Bill of Rights. In fact, this led to the wide use of foreign jurisprudence and legislation (from which were extracted argumentation models, patterns of balancing between principles and sometimes actual normative 'meanings': in other words, extra-systemic legal inferences. This article shows the existence of several patterns of legal argumentation based on foreign law which were developed by the South African Constitutional Court.

Refining a Heuristic for Constructing Bayesian Networks from Structured Arguments

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Wieten, G.M.; Bex, F.J.; van der Gaag, L.C.; Prakken, H.; Renooij, S.

2018-01-01

Recently, a heuristic was proposed for constructing Bayesian networks (BNs) from structured arguments. This heuristic helps domain experts who are accustomed to argumentation to transform their reasoning into a BN and subsequently weigh their case evidence in a probabilistic manner. While the

Empirical Scientific Research and Legal Studies Research--A Missing Link

Science.gov (United States)

Landry, Robert J., III

2016-01-01

This article begins with an overview of what is meant by empirical scientific research in the context of legal studies. With that backdrop, the argument is presented that without engaging in normative, theoretical, and doctrinal research in tandem with empirical scientific research, the role of legal studies scholarship in making meaningful…

Argumentation as a Strategy for Conceptual Learning of Dynamics

Science.gov (United States)

Eskin, Handan; Ogan-Bekiroglu, Feral

2013-01-01

Researchers have emphasized the importance of promoting argumentation in science classrooms for various reasons. However, the study of argumentation is still a young field and more research needs to be carried out on the tools and pedagogical strategies that can assist teachers and students in both the construction and evaluation of scientific…

One reason, several logics

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Evandro Agazzi

2011-06-01

Full Text Available Humans have used arguments for defending or refuting statements long before the creation of logic as a specialized discipline. This can be interpreted as the fact that an intuitive notion of "logical consequence" or a psychic disposition to articulate reasoning according to this pattern is present in common sense, and logic simply aims at describing and codifying the features of this spontaneous capacity of human reason. It is well known, however, that several arguments easily accepted by common sense are actually "logical fallacies", and this indicates that logic is not just a descriptive, but also a prescriptive or normative enterprise, in which the notion of logical consequence is defined in a precise way and then certain rules are established in order to maintain the discourse in keeping with this notion. Yet in the justification of the correctness and adequacy of these rules commonsense reasoning must necessarily be used, and in such a way its foundational role is recognized. Moreover, it remains also true that several branches and forms of logic have been elaborated precisely in order to reflect the structural features of correct argument used in different fields of human reasoning and yet insufficiently mirrored by the most familiar logical formalisms.

Scientific reasoning skills development in the introductory biology courses for undergraduates

Science.gov (United States)

Schen, Melissa S.

Scientific reasoning is a skill of critical importance to those students who seek to become professional scientists. Yet, there is little research on the development of such reasoning in science majors. In addition, scientific reasoning is often investigated as two separate entities: hypothetico-deductive reasoning and argumentation, even though these skills may be linked. With regard to argumentation, most investigations look at its use in discussing socioscientific issues, not in analyzing scientific data. As scientists often use the same argumentation skills to develop and support conclusions, this avenue needs to be investigated. This study seeks to address these issues and establish a baseline of both hypothetico-deductive reasoning and argumentation of scientific data of biology majors through their engagement in introductory biology coursework. This descriptive study investigated the development of undergraduates' scientific reasoning skills by assessing them multiple times throughout a two-quarter introductory biology course sequence for majors. Participants were assessed at the beginning of the first quarter, end of the first quarter, and end of the second quarter. A split-half version of the revised Lawson Classroom Test of Scientific Reasoning (LCTSR) and a paper and pencil argumentation instrument developed for this study were utilized to assess student hypothetico-deductive reasoning and argumentation skills, respectively. To identify factors that may influence scientific reasoning development, demographic information regarding age, gender, science coursework completed, and future plans was collected. Evidence for course emphasis on scientific reasoning was found in lecture notes, assignments, and laboratory exercises. This study did not find any trends of improvement in the students' hypothetico-deductive reasoning or argumentation skills either during the first quarter or over both quarters. Specific difficulties in the control of variables and

A study of accrual of arguments, with applications to evidential reasoning

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Prakken, Henry

2006-01-01

This paper presents a logical formalisation of accrual of arguments as a form of inference. The formalisation is given within the logical framework of Dung as instantiated by Pollock, and is shown to satisfy three principles that any treatment of accrual should satisfy. The formalisation of accrual

On the use of contexts for representing knowledge in defeasible argumentation

OpenAIRE

Chesñevar, Carlos Iván

1995-01-01

The notion of context and its importance in knowledge representation and nonmonotonic reasoning was first discussed in Artificial Intelligence by John McCarthy. Ever since, contexts have found many applications in developing knowledge-based reasoning systems. Defeasible argumentation has gained wide acceptance within the Al community in the last years. Different argument-based frameworks have been proposed. In this respect, MTDR (Simari & Loui, 1992) has come to be one of the most s...

Arguing collaboratively: Argumentative discourse types and their potential for knowledge building.

Science.gov (United States)

Felton, Mark; Garcia-Mila, Merce; Villarroel, Constanza; Gilabert, Sandra

2015-09-01

There is growing interest in using argumentative discourse in educational settings. However, in a previous study, we found that discourse goals (persuasion vs. consensus) while arguing can affect student outcomes in both content learning and reasoning. In this study, we look at argumentative discourse data from a previous study to ask how differences in discourse might account for the differences we observed in learning and reasoning outcomes. One hundred and five dialogues (57 disputative, 48 consensus) between 7th grade science students attending a public high school near Tarragona, Spain. Participants were randomly assigned to conditions and paired with peers who disagreed with them on three topics related to renewable energy sources. After instruction on each topic, they were asked to either 'argue to convince' (persuasion condition) or 'argue to reach consensus' (consensus condition) on that topic. Conversations were audio-recorded and transcribed for analysis. Students in the persuasion condition engaged in shorter conversational exchanges around argumentative claims and were more likely to use moves that foreclosed discussion, whereas students in the consensus condition were more likely to use moves that elicited, elaborated on, and integrated their partners' ideas. When arguing to reach - rather than defend - a conclusion, students are more likely to coconstruct knowledge by exchanging and integrating arguments. These findings are consistent with predictions about the potential of argumentation for knowledge building and suggest that teachers must attend to discourse goals when using argumentation to support learning and reasoning. © 2015 The British Psychological Society.

Laws of Language and Legal Language: A Study of Legal Language in Some Indonesian Regulations

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Shidarta Shidarta

2017-01-01

Full Text Available Legal language must follow the laws of language (grammar that widely known and commonly used by the public, including groups of the scientist. Legal language on the other hand also recognizes specific terminologies. These terminologies were introduced by jurists or by legislative power holders. Accordingly, legal language became the product of legal doctrines or political decisions. The problems arose when a number of compositions and legal terms turned out to be elusive, convoluted, and ambiguous due to the pattern of writing that was once done and because of certain considerations. This article proposed reviewing the factors that result in problems. The author presented a solution to observe using hermeneutic methods of law and legal reasoning. The author argued that the text of the law was not neutral since it was trapped not only by the laws of language but also by the perspective of the interpreters as they believed such a perspective was based on the guidance of legal science. By using legal hermeneutics can be checked the depth of the meaning of the law; while over the legal reasoning can be seen its rationale according to legal science.

Argudas: lessons for argumentation in biology based on a gene expression use case.

Science.gov (United States)

McLeod, Kenneth; Ferguson, Gus; Burger, Albert

2012-01-25

In situ hybridisation gene expression information helps biologists identify where a gene is expressed. However, the databases that republish the experimental information online are often both incomplete and inconsistent. Non-monotonic reasoning can help resolve such difficulties - one such form of reasoning is computational argumentation. Essentially this involves asking a computer to debate (i.e. reason about) the validity of a particular statement. Arguments are produced for both sides - the statement is true and, the statement is false - then the most powerful argument is used. In this work the computer is asked to debate whether or not a gene is expressed in a particular mouse anatomical structure. The information generated during the debate can be passed to the biological end-user, enabling their own decision-making process. This paper examines the evolution of a system, Argudas, which tests using computational argumentation in an in situ gene hybridisation gene expression use case. Argudas reasons using information extracted from several different online resources that publish gene expression information for the mouse. The development and evaluation of two prototypes is discussed. Throughout a number of issues shall be raised including the appropriateness of computational argumentation in biology and the challenges faced when integrating apparently similar online biological databases. From the work described in this paper it is clear that for argumentation to be effective in the biological domain the argumentation community need to develop further the tools and resources they provide. Additionally, the biological community must tackle the incongruity between overlapping and adjacent resources, thus facilitating the integration and modelling of biological information. Finally, this work highlights both the importance of, and difficulty in creating, a good model of the domain.

Heuristic Elements of Plausible Reasoning.

Science.gov (United States)

Dudczak, Craig A.

At least some of the reasoning processes involved in argumentation rely on inferences which do not fit within the traditional categories of inductive or deductive reasoning. The reasoning processes involved in plausibility judgments have neither the formal certainty of deduction nor the imputed statistical probability of induction. When utilizing…

Defining Legal Moralism

DEFF Research Database (Denmark)

Thaysen, Jens Damgaard

2015-01-01

This paper discusses how legal moralism should be defined. It is argued that legal moralism should be defined as the position that “For any X, it is always a pro tanto reason for justifiably imposing legal regulation on X that X is morally wrong (where “morally wrong” is not conceptually equivalent...... to “harmful”)”. Furthermore, a distinction between six types of legal moralism is made. The six types are grouped according to whether they are concerned with the enforcement of positive or critical morality, and whether they are concerned with criminalising, legally restricting, or refraining from legally...... protecting morally wrong behaviour. This is interesting because not all types of legal moralism are equally vulnerable to the different critiques of legal moralism that have been put forth. Indeed, I show that some interesting types of legal moralism have not been criticised at all....

Argumentation in the Chemistry Laboratory: Inquiry and Confirmatory Experiments

Science.gov (United States)

Katchevich, Dvora; Hofstein, Avi; Mamlok-Naaman, Rachel

2013-02-01

One of the goals of science education is to provide students with the ability to construct arguments—reasoning and thinking critically in a scientific context. Over the years, many studies have been conducted on constructing arguments in science teaching, but only few of them have dealt with studying argumentation in the laboratory. Our research focuses on the process in which students construct arguments in the chemistry laboratory while conducting various types of experiments. It was found that inquiry experiments have the potential to serve as an effective platform for formulating arguments, owing to the features of this learning environment. The discourse during inquiry-type experiments was found to be rich in arguments, whereas that during confirmatory-type experiments was found to be sparse in arguments. The arguments, which were developed during the discourse of an open inquiry experiment, focus on the hypothesis-building stage, analysis of the results, and drawing appropriate conclusions.

Natural-Born Arguers: Teaching How to Make the Best of Our Reasoning Abilities

Science.gov (United States)

Mercier, Hugo; Boudry, Maarten; Paglieri, Fabio; Trouche, Emmanuel

2017-01-01

We summarize the argumentative theory of reasoning, which claims that the main function of reasoning is to argue. In this theory, argumentation is seen as being essentially cooperative (people have to listen to others' arguments and be ready to change their mind) but with an adversarial dimension (their goal as argument producers is to convince).…

5½ Problems with Legal Positivism and Tax Law

OpenAIRE

Bogenschneider, Bret

2017-01-01

This essay is a reply to the famous paper by John Gardner: Legal Positivism: 5½ Myths and the more recent paper by John Prebble: Kelsen, the Principle of Exclusion of Contradictions, and General Anti-Avoidance Rules. The reply is developed from the perspective of tax law where the respective issues are of major significance. The “5½ problems” correspond to Gardner’s arguments and are as follows: (#1) Legal Positivism centers on determining whether a tax law is “legally valid” based on its sou...

[Scientific evidence on the legalization of abortion in Mexico City].

Science.gov (United States)

Gayón-Vera, Eduardo

2010-03-01

On April 24 2007, abortion before 12 weeks became legal in Mexico City. The arguments for this decision were: diminish the maternal morbidity and mortality, avoid a "severe health problem" and accomplish the women's physical, mental and social well being. To analyze the scientific evidences that support or reject this arguments. Retrospective study realized by bibliographic search of electronic data basis and Internet portals of interested groups. Mexico is considered by the World Health Organization, one of the countries in the world with low maternal mortality rates (abortion". In the hospitals of the Mexican Institute of Social Security, maternal deaths as consequence of induced abortions were, approximately, three every year. The evidences used as arguments in favor of abortion come from studies performed in Sub-Saharan African countries, which do not apply to Mexico. The scientific evidences show that induced abortion has important psychological sequels in women, a higher frequency of illegal drug abuse, alcoholism, child abuse, low birth weight in the following pregnancy, greater risk of subsequent miscarriage and greater mortality rate. There are no scientific evidences to support the arguments used for the legal approval of abortion in Mexico City.

The Uneven Legal Push for Europe

DEFF Research Database (Denmark)

Wind, Marlene; Martinsen, Dorte Sindbjerg; Rotger, Gabriel Pons

2009-01-01

National courts have been key players in the legal push for Europe, though notably to varying degrees. This paper examines the persisting variations in the referral rates of national courts and the underlying causal factors, aiming to better understand why some member states' courts have been more...... reluctant to join in the legal push for Europe. By using econometric methods, it challenges the modified neofunctionalist argument that the extent of intra-EC trade explains the referral practice of the individual member states. Majoritarian democracy is hypothesized as a causal factor in the low referral...... of majoritarian democracy on the number of referrals. The paper concludes that, owing to the uneven legal push for Europe, some member states and their citizens remain at arms' length from the legal integration process - and, in consequence, from the full impact of European integration....

[The structure of meta-ethical reasoning and "paradigmatic instability" of medicine].

Science.gov (United States)

Maroszyńska-Jezowska, B

1998-01-01

Meta-ethics is such a philosophical discipline that it analyses meaning and logical status of moral conceptions and arguments. Its scope of interest is focused on such problems, among others, as to what extent are moral values the intrinsic part of our reality and, on the other hand, to what extent are they merely the expression or certain conventions, emotions or directives. Codes of medical ethics and other legal acts concerning ethical commitments, both domestic and international (as, for example, Declaration of Helsinki), are based on a certain hidden meta-ethical presumption that morality is a human creation, and thus it belongs to a certain so-called "social realm". As such, medical ethics undergoes continuous transformations with regard to technological progress, which creates new moral challenges. This frequently leads to conflicts between moral, legal and praxiological norms under the absence of consensual conformity of utilitarian and deontological ways of moral reasoning. It may be useful for medical ethics to differentiate between axiological and thetic norms that are present in codes of medical ethics and in various international bioethical declarations and conventions.

Site planning for a final nuclear disposal site without rights of action? On the actual draft for a site selection law

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Wollenteit, Ulrich

2013-01-01

'Good' and 'substantial' grounds for determining the location of a Federal final repository by law are not apparent. The acceleration argument from the Stendal decision is not available. The legitimacy argument provides no substantial reason for believing that the implementation of an administrative planning permission hearing or approval procedure is associated with significant disadvantages for the common weal. Thus, there is no justifiable reason for a reduction of legal protection. However, the fundamental right to legal protection guarantee requires that the expropriation may be examined comprehensively on its legality in factual and legal relationship by means of the judiciary power.

The Slippery Slope Argument in the Ethical Debate on Genetic Engineering of Humans.

Science.gov (United States)

Walton, Douglas

2017-12-01

This article applies tools from argumentation theory to slippery slope arguments used in current ethical debates on genetic engineering. Among the tools used are argumentation schemes, value-based argumentation, critical questions, and burden of proof. It is argued that so-called drivers such as social acceptance and rapid technological development are also important factors that need to be taken into account alongside the argumentation scheme. It is shown that the slippery slope argument is basically a reasonable (but defeasible) form of argument, but is often flawed when used in ethical debates because of failures to meet the requirements of its scheme.

Some medical and biological reasons of drunkenness and alcoholism and feature of their medico-legal establishment

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Г. А. Білецька

2014-12-01

Full Text Available The article is sanctified to some вiomedical questions of reasons of drunkenness and alcoholism, and also features of their establishment in practice of medico-legal expert in the process of examining and dead body of living man. Study of constitutional and individual features of organism of man, terms of stay and reception of алкогоя help more exactly to diagnose the state of alcoholic intoxication, that is reflected in the conclusion of expert and can be proof on criminal and civil cases.

Perspective Taking and Synchronous Argumentation for Learning the Day/Night Cycle

Science.gov (United States)

Schwarz, Baruch B.; Schur, Yaron; Pensso, Haim; Tayer, Naama

2011-01-01

Changing practices in schools is a very complex endeavor. This paper is about new practices we prompted to foster collaboration and critical reasoning in science classrooms: the presentation of pictures representing different perspectives, small group synchronous argumentation, and moderation of synchronous argumentation. A CSCL tool helped in…

Reaching Agreement: The Structure & Pragmatics of Critical Care Nurses' Informal Argument

Science.gov (United States)

Hagler, Debra A.; Brem, Sarah K.

2008-01-01

The hospital critical care unit provides an authentic, high-stakes setting for studying reasoning, argumentation, and discourse. In particular, it allows examination of structural and pragmatic features of informal collaborative argument created while participants are engaged in familiar, meaningful activities central to their work. The nursing…

Conscientious refusals and reason-giving.

Science.gov (United States)

Marsh, Jason

2014-07-01

Some philosophers have argued for what I call the reason-giving requirement for conscientious refusal in reproductive healthcare. According to this requirement, healthcare practitioners who conscientiously object to administering standard forms of treatment must have arguments to back up their conscience, arguments that are purely public in character. I argue that such a requirement, though attractive in some ways, faces an overlooked epistemic problem: it is either too easy or too difficult to satisfy in standard cases. I close by briefly considering whether a version of the reason-giving requirement can be salvaged despite this important difficulty. © 2013 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

The effectiveness of argumentation in tutorial dialogues with an Intelligent Tutoring System for genetic risk of breast cancer

Science.gov (United States)

Cedillos-Whynott, Elizabeth M.; Wolfe, Christopher R.; Widmer, Colin L.; Brust-Renck, Priscila G.; Weil, Audrey; Reyna, Valerie F.

2017-01-01

BRCA Gist is an Intelligent Tutoring System that helps women understand issues related to genetic testing and breast cancer risk. In two laboratory experiments and a field experiment with community and web-based samples, an avatar asked 120 participants to produce arguments for and against genetic testing for breast cancer risk. Two raters assessed the number of argumentation elements (claim, reason, backing, etc.) found in response to prompts soliciting arguments for and against genetic testing for breast cancer risk (IRR=.85). When asked to argue for genetic testing, 53.3 % failed to meet the minimum operational definition of making an argument, a claim supported by one or more reasons. When asked to argue against genetic testing, 59.3 % failed to do so. Of those who failed to generate arguments most simply listed disconnected reasons. However, participants who provided arguments against testing (40.7 %) performed significantly higher on a posttest of declarative knowledge. In each study we found positive correlations between the quality of arguments against genetic testing (i.e., number of argumentation elements) and genetic risk categorization scores. Although most interactions did not contain two or more argument elements, when more elements of arguments were included in the argument against genetic testing interaction, participants had greater learning outcomes. Apparently, many participants lack skills in making coherent arguments. These results suggest an association between argumentation ability (knowing how to make complex arguments) and subsequent learning. Better education in developing arguments may be necessary for people to learn from generating arguments within Intelligent Tutoring Systems and other settings. PMID:26511370

The Use and Incorporation of Extralegal Insights in Legal Reasoning

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Ivo Giesen

2015-01-01

Full Text Available Following the US example, European scholarship has seen more and more interdisciplinary or multidisciplinary academic work being carried out over the last few decades, not only in criminal law but also relating to private law and civil procedure. In such studies ‘extralegal’ knowledge from, for example, psychology, sociology and economics, is combined with existing legal insights and transformed into ‘novel’ legal knowledge. This has often led to new thoughts on how to organize our legal landscape and to new public policy issues and solutions.An intriguing question underlying these studies is whether it is in fact possible – and if so, how, why and when – to leap from such ‘extralegal’ insights to normative legal conclusions. How and when can any researcher step over from, for example, empirical psychological facts to legal normative value judgments (as one is required to do from a legal end, for instance as a judge ruling on a case? What, if anything, allows anyone to do so? What are the conditions under which it would be safe to say that one could cross over from one side to the other?By reviewing the existing methodological literature on this topic and by linking up with ideas about the (analogous use of comparative law materials, this paper – methodological in nature – tries to come up with a workable ‘method’ for crossing the border between social science disciplines and the law. As it turns out, a due process approach is the best available option. This approach asks of judges, practitioners and scholars to become familiar with the methodology of the social sciences. That hurdle might be overcome by using court-appointed experts to evaluate the usefulness of the extralegal materials. The judge would thus resort to an expert to advise him on how to be a decent gatekeeper when it comes to the possible use of insights from social sciences.

The Multiplication Effect of Legal Insurance

NARCIS (Netherlands)

J.P.B. De Mot (Jef); B. Depoorter (Ben); M.G. Faure (Michael)

2016-01-01

textabstractBecause legal insurance policies cover the expenses of plaintiffs in bringing legal claims, such policies increase the risk of negligent or careless acts by tortfeasors. For this reason, potential tortfeasors would prefer to avoid injuring holders of legal insurance policies. Since

The emerging public discourse on state legalization of marijuana for recreational use in the US: Analysis of news media coverage, 2010-2014.

Science.gov (United States)

McGinty, Emma E; Samples, Hillary; Bandara, Sachini N; Saloner, Brendan; Bachhuber, Marcus A; Barry, Colleen L

2016-09-01

US states have begun to legalize marijuana for recreational use. In the absence of clear scientific evidence regarding the likely public health consequences of legalization, it is important to understand how the risks and benefits of this policy are being discussed in the national dialogue. To assess the public discourse on recreational marijuana policy, we assessed the volume and content of US news media coverage of the topic. We analyzed the content of a 20% random sample of news stories published/aired in high circulation/viewership print, television, and Internet news sources from 2010 to 2014 (N=610). News media coverage of recreational marijuana policy was heavily concentrated in news outlets from the four states (AK, CO, OR, WA) and DC that legalized marijuana for recreational use during the study period. Overall, 53% of news stories mentioned pro-legalization arguments and 47% mentioned anti-legalization arguments. The most frequent pro-legalization arguments posited that legalization would reduce criminal justice involvement/costs (20% of news stories) and increase tax revenue (19%). Anti-legalization arguments centered on adverse public health consequences, such as detriments to youth health and well-being (22%) and marijuana-impaired driving (6%). Some evidence-informed public health regulatory options, like marketing and packaging restrictions, were mentioned in 5% of news stories or fewer. As additional states continue to debate legalization of marijuana for recreational use, it is critical for the public health community to develop communication strategies that accurately convey the rapidly evolving research evidence regarding recreational marijuana policy. Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

The Legal Ethical Backbone of Conscientious Refusal

DEFF Research Database (Denmark)

Munthe, Christian; Nielsen, Morten Ebbe Juul

2017-01-01

This article analyzes the idea of a legal right to conscientious refusal for healthcare professionals from a basic legal ethical standpoint, using refusal to perform tasks related to legal abortion (in cases of voluntary employment) as a case in point. The idea of a legal right to conscientious...... refusal is distinguished from ideas regarding moral rights or reasons related to conscientious refusal, and none of the latter are found to support the notion of a legal right. Reasons for allowing some sort of room for conscientious refusal for healthcare professionals based on the importance of cultural...... identity and the fostering of a critical atmosphere might provide some support, if no countervailing factors apply. One such factor is that a legal right to healthcare professionals’ conscientious refusal must comply with basic legal ethical tenets regarding the rule of law and equal treatment...

Coherence-driven argumentation to norm consensus

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Joseph, S.; Prakken, H.

2009-01-01

In this paper coherence-based models are proposed as an alternative to logic-based BDI and argumentation models for the reasoning of normative agents. A model is provided for how two coherence-based agents can deliberate on how to regulate a domain of interest. First a deductive coherence model

Arguments Whose Strength Depends on Continuous Variation

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

James Franklin

2013-03-01

Full Text Available Both the traditional Aristotelian and modern symbolic approaches to logic have seen logic in terms of discrete symbol processing. Yet there are several kinds of argument whose validity depends on some topological notion of continuous variation, which is not well captured by discrete symbols. Examples include extrapolation and slippery slope arguments, sorites, fuzzy logic, and those involving closeness of possible worlds. It is argued that the natural first attempts to analyze these notions and explain their relation to reasoning fail, so that ignorance of their nature is profound.

Insult in Context: Incorporating Speech Act Theory in Doctrinal Legal Analysis of Interpretative Discussions

NARCIS (Netherlands)

H.T.M. Kloosterhuis (Harm)

2015-01-01

textabstractIn this article, I want to show that some doctrinal problems of legal interpretation and argumentation can be analysed in a more precise way than a standard doctrinal analysis, when we use insights from speech act theory and argumentation theory. Taking a discussion about the accusation

Preservice Science Teachers' Epistemological Beliefs and Informal Reasoning Regarding Socioscientific Issues

Science.gov (United States)

Ozturk, Nilay; Yilmaz-Tuzun, Ozgul

2017-12-01

This study investigated preservice elementary science teachers' (PSTs) informal reasoning regarding socioscientific issues (SSI), their epistemological beliefs, and the relationship between informal reasoning and epistemological beliefs. From several SSIs, nuclear power usage was selected for this study. A total of 647 Turkish PSTs enrolled in three large universities in Turkey completed the open-ended questionnaire, which assessed the participants' informal reasoning about the target SSI, and Schommer's (1990) Epistemological Questionnaire. The participants' epistemological beliefs were assessed quantitatively and their informal reasoning was assessed both qualitatively and quantitatively. The findings revealed that PSTs preferred to generate evidence-based arguments rather than intuitive-based arguments; however, they failed to generate quality evidence and present different types of evidence to support their claims. Furthermore, among the reasoning quality indicators, PSTs mostly generated supportive argument construction. Regarding the use of reasoning modes, types of risk arguments and political-oriented arguments emerged as the new reasoning modes. The study demonstrated that the PSTs had different epistemological beliefs in terms of innate ability, omniscient authority, certain knowledge, and quick learning. Correlational analyses revealed that there was a strong negative correlation between the PSTs' certain knowledge and counterargument construction, and there were negative correlations between the PSTs' innate ability, certain knowledge, and quick learning dimensions of epistemological beliefs and their total argument construction. This study has implications for both science teacher education and the practice of science education. For example, PST teacher education programs should give sufficient importance to training teachers that are skillful and knowledgeable regarding SSIs. To achieve this, specific SSI-related courses should form part of science

Scrutinizing Immutability: Research on Sexual Orientation and U.S. Legal Advocacy for Sexual Minorities.

Science.gov (United States)

Diamond, Lisa M; Rosky, Clifford J

2016-01-01

We review scientific research and legal authorities to argue that the immutability of sexual orientation should no longer be invoked as a foundation for the rights of individuals with same-sex attractions and relationships (i.e., sexual minorities). On the basis of scientific research as well as U.S. legal rulings regarding lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) rights, we make three claims: First, arguments based on the immutability of sexual orientation are unscientific, given what we now know from longitudinal, population-based studies of naturally occurring changes in the same-sex attractions of some individuals over time. Second, arguments based on the immutability of sexual orientation are unnecessary, in light of U.S. legal decisions in which courts have used grounds other than immutability to protect the rights of sexual minorities. Third, arguments about the immutability of sexual orientation are unjust, because they imply that same-sex attractions are inferior to other-sex attractions, and because they privilege sexual minorities who experience their sexuality as fixed over those who experience their sexuality as fluid. We conclude that the legal rights of individuals with same-sex attractions and relationships should not be framed as if they depend on a certain pattern of scientific findings regarding sexual orientation.

Site planning for a final nuclear disposal site without rights of action? On the actual draft for a site selection law; Standortplanung fuer ein atomares Endlager ohne Klagerechte? Zum aktuellen Entwurf fuer ein Standortsuchgesetz

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

Wollenteit, Ulrich [Kanzlei Rechtsanwaelte Guenther, Hamburg (Germany)

2013-05-15

'Good' and 'substantial' grounds for determining the location of a Federal final repository by law are not apparent. The acceleration argument from the Stendal decision is not available. The legitimacy argument provides no substantial reason for believing that the implementation of an administrative planning permission hearing or approval procedure is associated with significant disadvantages for the common weal. Thus, there is no justifiable reason for a reduction of legal protection. However, the fundamental right to legal protection guarantee requires that the expropriation may be examined comprehensively on its legality in factual and legal relationship by means of the judiciary power.

Abortion as empowerment: reproductive rights activism in a legally restricted context.

Science.gov (United States)

McReynolds-Pérez, Julia

2017-11-08

This paper analyzes the strategies used by activist health professionals in Argentina who justify providing abortion despite legal restrictions on the procedure. These "insider activists" make a case for abortion rights by linking pregnancy termination to a woman's ability to exert agency at a key point in her reproductive life, and argue that refusing women access to the procedure constitutes a grievous health risk. This argument frames pregnancy termination as an issue of empowerment and also as a medical necessity. This article is based on ethnographic research conducted in Argentina in 2013 and 2015, which includes in-depth interviews with abortion activists and health professionals and ethnographic observation at activist events and in clinics. During the period of my field research, the medical staff in one clinic shifted from abortion counseling, based on a harm reduction model, to legal pregnancy termination, a new mode of abortion provision where they directly provided abortions based on the legal health exception. These insider activists formalized the latter approach by creating a diagnostic instrument that frames women's "bio-psycho-social" reasons for wishing to terminate a pregnancy as medically justified. The clinical practice analyzed in this article raises important questions about the potential for health professionals to take on an activist role by making safe abortion accessible, even in a context where the procedure is highly restricted.

Stare Decisis: Dueling Legal Interpretations of the Douglas County, Colorado Choice Scholarship Program

Science.gov (United States)

Fox, Robert A.

2016-01-01

In the absence of incontrovertible performance data in support of, or opposition to, school vouchers, court decisions on their legality become increasingly important. Analysis of legal challenges provides a rich opportunity for scholars and policymakers to follow arguments for or against their positions. We present a chronicle of the litigation…

Arguments for religious tolerance in Colombia, 1832-1853

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

José David Cortés Guerrero

2017-07-01

Full Text Available This article shows the arguments, pros and cons, about religious tolerance in Colombia between 1832 and 1853 before it was legalized by the constitution of that year. Therefore, we are not interested about the arrival of different churches than the Catholic but we want to present the previous discussions that allowed their later arrival. Equally, the article shows the pragmatic vision of the tolerance, which was seen as a necessary concept for civilization and progress.

Should commercial organ donation be legalized in Germany? An ethical discourse.

Science.gov (United States)

Keller, F; Winkler, U; Mayer, J; Stracke, S

2007-03-01

We evaluated the arguments pro and con concerning kidney sales from a German perspective. At present, we see social, medical, and ethical reasons why organ selling should not be legalized in Germany. Legalization of organ selling would weaken the principle of solidarity within the German health system. Conversely, profit making will undermine the principle of social justice. Within the present social system in Germany, there is no economic pressure to sell an organ to save life, and there is no medical need to buy a kidney. Also, there exists the risk that opening the market for organ sales will de-motivate potential directed organ donors. Relatives would have more doubts about giving their consent to donate organs of their deceased. Moreover, the historical experience with the "action T4" of the Nazi regime sensitized German society for the categorical imperative set forth by Immanuel Kant (1724-1804), namely that man is not a means, but an end to himself. By selling one's kidney, the donor uses himself as a means and as an instrument for the end result of gaining money. With directed organ donation, the welfare of the recipient is the end result. The pending reform of the German health system needs a more communitarian sense, which will be eroded should organs be sold and no longer donated as gifts. Germany's special historical experience and a deeply embedded consent toward ethical values give reason for the prohibition of organ selling in Germany.

A Legal Reasoning Component of a Network Security Command and Control System

Science.gov (United States)

2010-03-01

United States Code VA Vulnerability Assessment VLC Virtual Legal Cell xv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors would like to humbly thank Professor Bret...cyberspace environment. In this thesis, the authors address the information warrior’s challenge of obtaining just-in-time legal advice. They...PROPOSED VIRTUAL DYNAMIC LEGAL CELL One of the challenges in cyberspace is to define and detect a hostile act or the use of force. Another major

Moral Philosophy, Moral Expertise, and the Argument from Disagreement.

Science.gov (United States)

Cross, Ben

2016-03-01

Several recent articles have weighed in on the question of whether moral philosophers can be counted as moral experts. One argument denying this has been rejected by both sides of the debate. According to this argument, the extent of disagreement in modern moral philosophy prevents moral philosophers from being classified as moral experts. Call this the Argument From Disagreement (AD). In this article, I defend a version of AD. Insofar as practical issues in moral philosophy are characterized by disagreement between moral philosophers who are more or less equally well credentialed on the issue, non-philosophers have no good reasons to defer to their views. © 2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Socioscientific Argumentation of Pre-Service Teachers about Genetically Modified Organisms

Science.gov (United States)

Herawati, D.; Ardianto, D.

2017-09-01

This study aims to investigate socioscientific argumentation of pre-service teachers of science and non-science major regarding Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) issue. We used descriptive study and involved second-year pre-service teachers from two major, 28 pre-service science teachers (PSTs) and 28 pre-service non-science teachers (PNSTs) as participants. Paper and pencil test was administered in order to obtain the data of PSTs’ and PNSTs’ argument about GMOs. All of the data were analyzed by descriptive analysis. We applied Toulmin Argumentation Pattern (TAP) as a basic framework to identify the argumentation component. The result showed that both PSTs and PNSTs were able to propose an argument with a claim, data, and/or warrant.. Most of their argument contain data which provided in the text, without any further reasoning or relevant scientific knowledge. So, the coherency between argumentation component in both PSTs and PNSTs was limited. However, PSTs are more able to propose coherent arguments than PNSTs. These findings indicated that educational background and learning experiences may influence to pre-service teacher argumentation in the context of GMOs. Beside that, teaching and learning process which focused on the socioscientific issues is necessary to develop pre-service teachers’ argumentation

Process of Argumentation in High School Biology Class: A Qualitative Analysis

Science.gov (United States)

Ramli, M.; Rakhmawati, E.; Hendarto, P.; Winarni

2017-02-01

Argumentation skill can be nurtured by designing a lesson in which students are provided with the opportunity to argue. This research aims to analyse argumentation process in biology class. The participants were students of three biology classes from different high schools in Surakarta Indonesia. One of the classroom was taught by a student teacher, and the rest were instructed by the assigned teachers. Through a classroom observation, oral activities were noted, audio-recorded and video-taped. Coding was done based on the existence of claiming-reasoning-evidence (CRE) process by McNeill and Krajcik. Data was analysed qualitatively focusing on the role of teachers to initiate questioning to support argumentation process. The lesson design of three were also analysed. The result shows that pedagogical skill of teachers to support argumentation process, such as skill to ask, answer, and respond to students’ question and statements need to be trained intensively. Most of the argumentation found were only claiming, without reasoning and evidence. Teachers have to change the routine of mostly posing open-ended questions to students, and giving directly a correct answer to students’ questions. Knowledge and skills to encourage student to follow inquiry-based learning have to be acquired by teachers.

Brain Imaging, Forward Inference, and Theories of Reasoning

Science.gov (United States)

Heit, Evan

2015-01-01

This review focuses on the issue of how neuroimaging studies address theoretical accounts of reasoning, through the lens of the method of forward inference (Henson, 2005, 2006). After theories of deductive and inductive reasoning are briefly presented, the method of forward inference for distinguishing between psychological theories based on brain imaging evidence is critically reviewed. Brain imaging studies of reasoning, comparing deductive and inductive arguments, comparing meaningful versus non-meaningful material, investigating hemispheric localization, and comparing conditional and relational arguments, are assessed in light of the method of forward inference. Finally, conclusions are drawn with regard to future research opportunities. PMID:25620926

Brain imaging, forward inference, and theories of reasoning.

Science.gov (United States)

Heit, Evan

2014-01-01

This review focuses on the issue of how neuroimaging studies address theoretical accounts of reasoning, through the lens of the method of forward inference (Henson, 2005, 2006). After theories of deductive and inductive reasoning are briefly presented, the method of forward inference for distinguishing between psychological theories based on brain imaging evidence is critically reviewed. Brain imaging studies of reasoning, comparing deductive and inductive arguments, comparing meaningful versus non-meaningful material, investigating hemispheric localization, and comparing conditional and relational arguments, are assessed in light of the method of forward inference. Finally, conclusions are drawn with regard to future research opportunities.

Inductive and deductive reasoning in obsessive-compulsive disorder.

Science.gov (United States)

Liew, Janice; Grisham, Jessica R; Hayes, Brett K

2018-06-01

This study examined the hypothesis that participants diagnosed with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) show a selective deficit in inductive reasoning but are equivalent to controls in deductive reasoning. Twenty-five participants with OCD and 25 non-clinical controls made inductive and deductive judgments about a common set of arguments that varied in logical validity and the amount of positive evidence provided (premise sample size). A second inductive reasoning task required participants to make forced-choice decisions and rate the usefulness of diverse evidence or non-diverse evidence for evaluating arguments. No differences in deductive reasoning were found between participants diagnosed with OCD and control participants. Both groups saw that the amount of positive evidence supporting a conclusion was an important guide for evaluating inductive arguments. However, those with OCD showed less sensitivity to premise diversity in inductive reasoning than controls. The findings were similar for both emotionally neutral and OCD-relevant stimuli. The absence of a clinical control group means that it is difficult to know whether the deficit in diversity-based reasoning is specific to those with OCD. People with OCD are impaired in some forms of inductive reasoning (using diverse evidence) but not others (use of sample size). Deductive reasoning appears intact in those with OCD. Difficulties using evidence diversity when reasoning inductively may maintain OCD symptoms through reduced generalization of learned safety information. Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Between solidarity and argument: Interpersonal negotiation in two legal genres

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Krisda Chaemsaithong

2016-11-01

Full Text Available This study presents a comparative examination of interpersonal negotiation in two monologic courtroom genres: the opening statement and closing argument. Drawing upon a corpus of three high-profile American trials, the quantitative and qualitative analysis identifies the traces and degree of the jury’s presence through lexico-grammatical resources, and reveals distinct interactional patterns, which are indicative of the interactive goals of the two speech genres. Such relational practice does not merely “oil the wheels” of courtroom communication, but also constitutes a key way in the meaning-making process of these genres. The findings attest to the centrality of relational work in accomplishing transactional goals in institutional discourses.

Varieties of clinical reasoning.

Science.gov (United States)

Bolton, Jonathan W

2015-06-01

Clinical reasoning comprises a variety of different modes of inference. The modes that are practiced will be influenced by the sociological characteristics of the clinical settings and the tasks to be performed by the clinician. This article presents C.S. Peirce's typology of modes of inference: deduction, induction and abduction. It describes their differences and their roles as stages in scientific argument. The article applies the typology to reasoning in clinical settings. The article describes their differences, and their roles as stages in scientific argument. It then applies the typology to reasoning in typical clinical settings. Abduction is less commonly taught or discussed than induction and deduction. However, it is a common mode of inference in clinical settings, especially when the clinician must try to make sense of a surprising phenomenon. Whether abduction is followed up with deductive and inductive verification is strongly influenced by situational constraints and the cognitive and psychological stamina of the clinician. Recognizing the inevitability of abduction in clinical practice and its value to discovery is important to an accurate understanding of clinical reasoning. © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

On Derek Parfit' s Objectivist Theory of Reasons for Action:Desire-based or Value-based?

Institute of Scientific and Technical Information of China (English)

Zhang Jieting

2017-01-01

The issue of the sources of normativity has been a very hot topic in contem-porary Anglo-American ethics. Some scholars believe that the normativity should be interpre-ted as a reason-implying concept and it can be analyzed further as moral reasons. So,to better understand the sources of normativity,we have to explore the sources of the reasons further. Generally,there are two competing views on the sources of reasons:subjectivism and objectiv-ism. Subjectivism argues that the reasons for action are ultimately based on desires or facts a-bout desires. Objectivism argues that the reasons are given by the objects,determined by the value of the relevant facts about desired objects. Parfit proposed an objectivist theory of reasons for action,and he tried to prove that reasons are external,objective,and value-based,through his three arguments,i. e. ,the agony argument,the all or none argument,and the incoherence argument. He finally demonstrated that what can determine reasons for action are facts rather than desires.

Embryos, individuals, and persons: an argument against embryo creation and research.

Science.gov (United States)

Tollefsen, C

2001-01-01

One strategy for arguing that it should be legally permissible to create human embryos, or to use spare human embryos, for scientific research purposes involves the claim that such embryos cannot be persons because they are not human individuals while twinning may yet take place. Being a human individual is considered to be by most people a necessary condition for being a human person. I argue first that such an argument against the personhood of embryos must be rationally conclusive if their destruction in public places such as laboratories is to be countenanced. I base this argument on a popular understanding of the role that the notion of privacy plays in abortion laws. I then argue that such arguments against personhood are not rationally conclusive. The claim that the early embryos is not a human individual is not nearly as obvious as some assert.

Graphical Argument in the Essayist Prose of the Pesquisa FAPESP Journal

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Irene Machado

2016-03-01

Full Text Available This article investigates the concept of graphical argumentation as an exercise of essayistic prose developed in the process of writing expansion in printed texts. It is understood that by expanding the scope of the word in the context of visual graphics processes such as drawings, photography and infographics, arguments are achievements much more of diagrammatic reasoning than of rhetorical elaboration. Proof of that are graphic arguments, which have become an inalienable modeling from texts of scientific communication, such as the ones produced in the Pesquisa FAPESP journal.

Argumentation Key to Communicating Climate Change to the Public

Science.gov (United States)

Bleicher, R. E.; Lambert, J. L.

2012-12-01

Argumentation plays an important role in how we communicate climate change science to the public and is a key component integrated throughout the Next Generation Science Standards. A scientific argument can be described as a disagreement between explanations with data being used to justify each position. Argumentation is social process where two or more individuals construct and critique arguments (Kuhn & Udell, 2003; Nussbaum, 1997). Sampson, Grooms, and Walker's (2011) developed a framework for understanding the components of a scientific argument. The three components start with a claim (a conjecture, conclusion, explanation, or an answer to a research question). This claim must fit the evidence (observations that show trends over time, relationships between variables or difference between groups). The evidence must be justified with reasoning (explains how the evidence supports the explanation and whey it should count as support). In a scientific argument, or debate, the controversy focuses on how data were collected, what data can or should be included, and what inferences can be made based on a set of evidence. Toulmin's model (1969) also includes rebutting or presenting an alternative explanation supported by counter evidence and reasoning of why the alternative is not the appropriate explanation for the question of the problem. The process of scientific argumentation should involve the construction and critique of scientific arguments, one that involves the consideration of alternative hypotheses (Lawson, 2003). Scientific literacy depends as much on the ability to refute and recognize poor scientific arguments as much as it does on the ability to present an effective argument based on good scientific data (Osborne, 2010). Argument is, therefore, a core feature of science. When students learn to construct a sound scientific argument, they demonstrate critical thinking and a mastery of the science being taught. To present a convincing argument in support of

Strategies to Support Ethical Reasoning in Student Argumentation

Science.gov (United States)

Carlton Griswold, Joan; Ting Chowning, Jean

2013-01-01

This article discusses the importance and benefits of incorporating ethics\tinto the classroom and presents five strategies that both scaffold students'\tunderstanding of ethical issues and support students' abilities to come to a reasoned and well-supported decision about those issues. (Contains 1 table and 4 notes.)

The Most Reasonable Answer: Helping Students Build Better Arguments Together

Science.gov (United States)

Reznitskaya, Alina; Wilkinson, Ian A. G.

2017-01-01

"The Most Reasonable Answer" is an innovative and comprehensive guide to engaging students in inquiry dialogue--a type of talk used in text-based classroom discussions. During inquiry dialogue, students collectively search for the most reasonable answers to big, controversial questions, and, as a result, enhance their argumentation…

The Legal Ethical Backbone of Conscientious Refusal.

Science.gov (United States)

Munthe, Christian; Nielsen, Morten Ebbe Juul

2017-01-01

This article analyzes the idea of a legal right to conscientious refusal for healthcare professionals from a basic legal ethical standpoint, using refusal to perform tasks related to legal abortion (in cases of voluntary employment) as a case in point. The idea of a legal right to conscientious refusal is distinguished from ideas regarding moral rights or reasons related to conscientious refusal, and none of the latter are found to support the notion of a legal right. Reasons for allowing some sort of room for conscientious refusal for healthcare professionals based on the importance of cultural identity and the fostering of a critical atmosphere might provide some support, if no countervailing factors apply. One such factor is that a legal right to healthcare professionals' conscientious refusal must comply with basic legal ethical tenets regarding the rule of law and equal treatment, and this requirement is found to create serious problems for those wishing to defend the idea under consideration. We conclude that the notion of a legal right to conscientious refusal for any profession is either fundamentally incompatible with elementary legal ethical requirements, or implausible because it undermines the functioning of a related professional sector (healthcare) or even of society as a whole.

The Argumentative Quality of the Qualitative Research Report

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Adri Smaling

2002-09-01

Full Text Available The author argues that, to be convincing, the claims of a qualitative research report must be logically and clearly supported. Eight rules for good argumentative dialogue are presented. The author then presents the process of analogical reasoning to support cross-case generalization.

Critical Thinking in Moral Argumentation Contexts: A Virtue Ethical Approach

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Michelle Ciurria

2012-06-01

Full Text Available In traditional analytic philosophy, critical thinking is defined along Cartesian lines as rational and linear reasoning preclusive of intuitions, emotions and lived experience. According to Michael Gilbert, this view – which he calls the Natural Light Theory (NLT – fails because it arbitrarily excludes standard feminist forms of argumentation and neglects the essentially social nature of argumentation. In this paper, I argue that while Gilbert’s criticism is correct for argumentation in general, NLT fails in a distinctive and particularly problematic manner in moral argumentation contexts. This is because NLT calls for disputants to adopt an impartial attitude, which overlooks the fact that moral disputants qua moral agents are necessarily partial to their own values and interests. Adopting the impartial perspective would therefore alienate them from their values and interests, causing a kind of “moral schizophrenia.” Finally, I urge a re-valuation of epistemic virtue in argumentation.

Perelman, argument ad hominem et ethos rhétorique Perelman, ad Hominem Argument, and Rhetorical Ethos

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Michael Leff

2009-04-01

Full Text Available La conception de Perelman sur le rôle des personnes dans l’argumentation est l’une des marques les plus caractéristiques de sa rupture avec les hypothèses cartésiennes sur le raisonnement. Alors que le paradigme rationaliste cherchait à minimiser ou à éliminer les considérations personnelles comme étant dilatoires et non pertinentes dans ce cadre, Perelman insiste sur le fait que l’argumentation met inévitablement l’accent sur les personnes spécifiques impliquées dans l’argumentation et que la relation entre le locuteur et ce qui est dit est toujours pertinente et importante. En adoptant cette position, Perelman ressuscite implicitement la conception classique de la preuve par le caractère (argument par l’ethos ou « ethotique ». Mais, bien que la Nouvelle Rhétorique consacre une large place au débat sur l’acte et la personne dans l’argumentation, elle n’accorde pas beaucoup de réflexion au concept classique et mélange différentes approches à l’intérieur de la tradition. Le résultat est que Perelman traite le rôle du locuteur dans l’argumentation uniquement en référence à des techniques abstraites et ne prend pas en compte l’importance de l’examen des cas particuliers pour éclairer la compréhension du fonctionnement de l’argument ethotique en situation dans le contexte complexe de son utilisation effective. Par conséquent, la prise en compte par Perelman du rôle de la personne dans l’argumentation doit être complétée par la référence à des études de cas et c’est dans ce but que j’étudie l’argument ethotique dans le célèbre essai de W. E. B. DuBois « Sur M. Booker T. Washington et autres ».Perelman’s view of the role of persons in argument is one of the most distinctive features of his break with Cartesian assumptions about reasoning. Whereas the Rationalist paradigm sought to minimize or eliminate personal considerations by dismissing them as distracting and

Denying the Antecedent: Its Effective Use in Argumentation

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Mark A. Stone

2012-09-01

Full Text Available Denying the antecedent is an invalid form of reasoning that is typically identified and frowned upon as a formal fallacy. Contrary to arguments that it does not or at least should not occur, denying the antecedent is a legitimate and effective strategy for undermining a position. Since it is not a valid form of argument, it cannot prove that the position is false. But it can provide inductive evidence that this position is probably false. In this role, it is neither defective nor deceptive. Denying the antecedent provides inductive support for rejecting a claim as improbable.

On the Sophistication of Naïve Empirical Reasoning: Factors Influencing Mathematicians' Persuasion Ratings of Empirical Arguments

Science.gov (United States)

Weber, Keith

2013-01-01

This paper presents the results of an experiment in which mathematicians were asked to rate how persuasive they found two empirical arguments. There were three key results from this study: (a) Participants judged an empirical argument as more persuasive if it verified that integers possessed an infrequent property than if it verified that integers…

Ulysses arrangements in psychiatric treatment: towards proposals for their use based on 'sharing' legal capacity.

Science.gov (United States)

Bielby, Phil

2014-06-01

A 'Ulysses arrangement' (UA) is an agreement where a patient may arrange for psychiatric treatment or non-treatment to occur at a later stage when she expects to change her mind. In this article, I focus on 'competence-insensitive' UAs, which raise the question of the permissibility of overriding the patient's subsequent decisionally competent change of mind on the authority of the patient's own prior agreement. In "The Ethical Justification for Ulysses Arrangements", I consider sceptical and supportive arguments concerning competence-insensitive UAs, and argue that there are compelling reasons to give such UAs serious consideration. In "Decisional Competence and Legal Capacity in UAs", I examine the nature of decisional competence and legal capacity as they arise in UAs, an issue neglected by previous research. Using the distinctions which emerge, I then identify the legal structure of a competence-insensitive UA in terms of the types of legal capacity it embodies and go on to explain how types of legal capacity might be shared between the patient and a trusted other to offer support to the patient in the creation and implementation of a competence-insensitive UA. This is significant because it suggests possibilities for building patient support mechanisms into models of legal UAs, which has not addressed in the literature to date. Drawing on this, in "Using Insights from the Competence/Capacity Distinction to Enhance Patient Support in UAs", I offer two possible models to operationalize competence-insensitive UAs in law that allow for varying degrees of patient support through the involvement of a trusted other. Finally, I outline some potential obstacles implementing these models would face and highlight areas for further research.

Mastery of Scientific Argumentation on the Concept of Neutralization in Chemistry: A Malaysian Perspective

Science.gov (United States)

Heng, Lee Ling; Surif, Johari; Seng, Cher Hau; Ibrahim, Nor Hasniza

2015-01-01

Purpose: Argumentative practices are central to science education, and have recently been emphasised to promote students' reasoning skills and to develop student's understanding of scientific concepts. This study examines the mastery of scientific argumentation, based on the concept of neutralisation, among secondary level science students, when…

Exposing Errors and Removing Errors: Pushing the Boundaries in Legal English

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Christopher Williams

2017-04-01

Full Text Available As is well known, the language of the law tends to be relatively conservative in its style when compared with most other varieties of language. However, in recent decades we have witnessed a minor revolution in the way legal English has developed, largely as a result of pressures from the Plain language movement. An encrusted style of writing which had predominated for centuries is being overhauled, at least in the sphere of legislative texts, in an ongoing process which is transforming ‘legalese’ into standard formal English. As with any development involving change, there are detractors on the one hand and enthusiasts on the other. Referring to the benefits of drafting in plain language, Butt and Castle (2001: 89 affirm that “Errors are harder to find in dense and convoluted prose. Removing legalese helps lay bare any oversights in the original.” Central to the philosophy of plain language is the idea that a legally binding text should be understandable to laypersons. Inevitably, such a view clashes with the reasoning of many ‘traditionalist’ legal practitioners who argue that the main purpose of a legally binding text is that it should be able to withstand scrutiny from experts and perform the task it was meant to undertake, irrespective of whether it may be intelligible to a layperson. In this paper I will highlight some of the main arguments for and against this fundamental question of whether a legally binding text should be written with a non-expert readership in mind, focusing on the concept of ‘error’ which, from the perspective of the more traditionalist members of the law community, concerns the newly adopted terms or expressions introduced, in many cases, for the benefit of laypersons, whereas from the perspective of plain language proponents, the ‘error’ is to be found in the older style of ‘legalese’ which abounded until fairly recently making legal texts incomprehensible to most citizens and which has now

Pasado y futuro en la argumentación jurídica

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Joaquín Rodríguez-Toubes Muñiz

2011-06-01

ABSTRACT. In order to justify a legal decision or any other kind of legal conclusion, one must take into account sources which are previous and pre-existent to the argumentation itself (the past and predictions about the consequences that would be caused by one result or other (the future. Both focus of attention are reconcilable when looking to the future is required by the sources of the past. However, quite often tensions arise which have to be resolved by means of reasoning or decision-making. Looking to the past predominates in legal argumentation for good reasons, but the importance of the concern for the future in normative theory and practice, should not be ignored. The paper identifies six groups of justificatory elements that work successively in a sort of wheel of arguments about both the past and the future.

Analysis of scientific argumentation in two physical chemistry classrooms using the POGIL approach

Science.gov (United States)

Moon, Alena C.

The benefits of facilitating argumentation in science education have been well reported (Jimenez-Aleixandre & Erduran, 2007). Engaging in argumentation has shown to model authentic scientific inquiry as well as promote development of content knowledge. However, less emphasis has been placed on facilitating argumentation in upper level undergraduate courses, though it is important for evaluating undergraduate curricula to characterize upper level students' scientific reasoning. This work considers two implementations of the POGIL physical chemistry curriculum and evaluates the classroom argumentation. The researchers aimed to consider the content of the arguments and dialectical features characteristic of socially constructed arguments (Nielson, 2013). To do this, whole class sessions were videotaped and Toulmin's Argument Pattern (TAP) was used to identify the arguments generated during the class (Erduran, Simon, & Osborne, 2004). A learning progression on chemical thinking (Sevian & Talanquer, 2014) was used as a domain-specific measure of argument quality. Results show differences in argumentation between and across both classrooms that can be explained by analysis of instructor facilitation and the POGIL curriculum. The results from this work will be used to make recommendations for instructor facilitation of argumentation and reform of the POGIL curriculum.

THE CONSTITUTIONAL PRINCIPLE OF EQUALITY - LEGAL SIGNIFICANCE AND SOCIAL IMPLICATIONS -

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Marius ANDREESCU

2017-12-01

Full Text Available The equality in human rights and obligations, the equality of citizens before the law are fundamental categories of the theories on social democracy but also conditions of the lawful state, without which constitutional democracy cannot be conceived. In Romanian Constitution, this principle is consecrated in the form of equality of the citizens before the law and public authorities. There are also particular aspects of this principle consecrated in the Constitution. The constitutional principle of equality requires that equal treatment be applied to equal situations. This social and legal reality implies numerous interferences between the principle of equality and other constitutional principles. In this study, by using theoretical and jurisprudential arguments, we intend to demonstrate that, in relation to contemporary social reality, equality, as a constitutional principle, is a particular aspect of the principle of proportionality. The latter one expresses in essence the ideas of: fairness, justice, reasonableness and fair appropriateness of state decisions to the facts and legitimate aims proposed.

Public Reason Renaturalized

DEFF Research Database (Denmark)

Tønder, Lars

2014-01-01

. The article develops this argument via a sensorial orientation to politics that not only re-frames existing critiques of neo-Kantianism but also includes an alternative, renaturalized conception of public reason, one that allows us to overcome the disconnect between the account we give of reason and the way......This article takes up recent discussions of nature and the sensorium in order to rethink public reason in deeply divided societies. The aim is not to reject the role of reason-giving but rather to infuse it with new meaning, bringing the reasonable back to its sensorially inflected circumstances...... it is mobilized in a world of deep pluralism. The article concludes with a discussion of how a renaturalized conception of public reason might change the positioning of contemporary democratic theory vis-a-vis the struggle for empowerment and pluralization in an age of neo-liberalism and state-surveillance....

Identifying health insurance predictors and the main reported reasons for being uninsured among US immigrants by legal authorization status.

Science.gov (United States)

Vargas Bustamante, Arturo; Chen, Jie; Fang, Hai; Rizzo, John A; Ortega, Alexander N

2014-01-01

This study identifies differences in health insurance predictors and investigates the main reported reasons for lacking health insurance coverage between short-stayed (≤ 10 years) and long-stayed (>10 years) US immigrant adults to parse the possible consequences of the Affordable Care Act among immigrants by length of stay and documentation status. Foreign-born adults (18-64 years of age) from the 2009 California Health Interview Survey are the study population. Health insurance coverage predictors and the main reasons for being uninsured are compared across cohorts and by documentation status. A logistic-regression two-part multivariate model is used to adjust for confounding factors. The analyses determine that legal status is a strong health insurance predictor, particularly among long-stayed undocumented immigrants. Immigration status is the main reported reason for lacking health insurance. Although long-stayed documented immigrants are likely to benefit from the Affordable Care Act implementation, undocumented immigrants and short-stayed documented immigrants may encounter difficulties getting health insurance coverage. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Accounting Standards and Legal Capital in EU Law

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Loukas Panetsos

2016-09-01

Full Text Available This paper examines the interaction between accounting standards and legal capital in the European Union legal framework. More in particular, it attempts to compare on a parallel basis the distributional and behavioural function of both concepts and to address whether the current legal status quo in the European Union fulfils these functions. First, this paper makes a short reference to the various accounting families which are encountered today, with a strong emphasis on the distinction between Anglo-American and Continental systems. Then, it describes the EU accounting regulation and the introduction of IFRS in domestic legislation. Further, it discusses the concept of legal capital as it has been established in European jurisdictions and it points to the relevance of the Continental accounting standards. It is argued that both are characterized by paternalism, contrasting with Anglo-American standards and American distributional methods, which are outlined by contractariansm. The final argument is that the combination of legal capital rules and Anglo-American standards, like the IFRS, neither achieves the protective role prescribed to the former, nor guarantees the aims of the latter.

Case Briefs in Legal English Classes

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Bilová Stĕpánka

2016-06-01

Full Text Available A case brief can be described as a succinct summary of a case which specifies the facts, procedural history, legal issue(s, court decision and legal reasoning supporting the judgment, even though exact formats may vary. Case briefing is a demanding activity which is required from students during their law studies. The goal is to teach students to focus on the essential parts of the case and to obtain a thorough understanding of the case and the reasoning, which means the students need to employ their analytical and critical thinking skills.

Identifying fallacious arguments in a qualitative study of antipsychotic prescribing in dementia.

Science.gov (United States)

Donyai, Parastou

2017-10-01

Dementia can result in cognitive, noncognitive and behavioural symptoms which are difficult to manage. Formal guidelines for the care and management of dementia in the UK state that antipsychotics should only be prescribed where fully justified. This is because inappropriate use, particularly problematic in care-home settings, can produce severe side effects including death. The aim of this study was to explore the use of fallacious arguments in professionals' deliberations about antipsychotic prescribing in dementia in care-home settings. Fallacious arguments have the potential to become unremarkable discourses that construct and validate practices which are counter to guidelines. This qualitative study involved interviews with 28 care-home managers and health professionals involved in caring for patients with dementia. Potentially fallacious arguments were identified using qualitative content analysis and a coding framework constructed from existing explanatory models of fallacious reasoning. Fallacious arguments were identified in a range of explanations and reasons that participants gave for in answer to questions about initiating, reducing doses of and stopping antipsychotics in dementia. The dominant fallacy was false dichotomy. Appeal to popularity, tradition, consequence, emotion, or fear, and the slippery slope argument was also identified. Fallacious arguments were often formulated to present convincing cases whereby prescribing antipsychotics or maintaining existing doses (versus not starting medication or reducing the dose, for example) appeared as the only acceptable decision but this is not always the case. The findings could help health professionals to recognise and mitigate the effect of logic-based errors in decisions about the prescribing of antipsychotics in dementia. © 2016 Royal Pharmaceutical Society.

Two conceptions of legal principles

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Spaić Bojan

2017-01-01

Full Text Available The paper discusses the classical understanding of legal principles as the most general norms of a legal order, confronting it with Dworkin's and Alexy's understanding of legal principles as prima facie, unconditional commands. The analysis shows that the common, classical conception brings into question the status of legal principles as norms, by disreguarding their usefulness in judicial reasoning, while, conversely, the latterhas significant import forlegal practice and consequently for legal dogmatics. It is argued that the heuristic fruitfulness of understanding principles as optimization commands thusbecomesapparent. When we understand the relation of priciples to the idea of proportionality, as thespecific mode of their application, which is different from the supsumtive mode of applying rules, the theory of legal principles advanced by Dworkin and Alexy appears therefore to be descriptively better than others, but not without its flaws.

Kant's Transcendental Arguments as Conceptual Proofs | Stapleford ...

African Journals Online (AJOL)

The paper is an attempt to explain what a transcendental argument is for Kant. The interpretation is based on a reading of the “Discipline of Pure Reason,” sections 1 and 4, of the first Critique. The author first identifies several statements that Kant makes about the method of proof he followed in the “Analytic of Principles,” ...

From Reified Abstractions to Situated Contexts: Feminist Jurisprudence, Paradigm Shift and Legal Change

OpenAIRE

Petoussi, Vassiliki Jr.

1998-01-01

This study addresses the extent to which feminist jurisprudence literature has developed the potential to initiate a legal paradigm shift leading to legal and consequent social change that would alleviate gender inequality. Drawing upon Kuhn's (1970) and Stacey and Thorne's (1985) arguments, I theorized that for a paradigm shift centered upon women and women's experiences to occur, feminist jurisprudence, particularly second- and third-phase feminist jurisprudence, needs to be incorporated i...

Book Scarcity, Law Libraries and the Legal Profession in Nigeria.

Science.gov (United States)

Jegede, Oluremi

1992-01-01

Discussion of the effect of book scarcity on law libraries and the legal profession in Nigeria addresses the country's law library collections, reasons for book scarcity, local publication of legal literature, reasons why Nigerians publish abroad, and measures already taken and suggested measures to combat book scarcity. (14 references) (MES)

Types, typologies, arguments

OpenAIRE

Plantin, Christian

2017-01-01

The concept of arguments schemes is fundamental for argumentation studies; but its implementation is not obvious. The first section of this contribution briefly starts from the concepts of argument scheme, typology of arguments schemes, and the foundational catalogue of 28 topoi from Aristotle's Rhetoric. The application of the "topical method" is first based on the knowledge of typologies of arguments, and then on the precise features defining an argument type. The practical question that re...

Achieving Excellence in the Legal Profession in a Globalized World ...

African Journals Online (AJOL)

The increasing impacts of information technology and the internet have demystified knowledge and skills in all professions leaving the lawyer of today a person of business and ethics. The key argument in this paper is that ... knowledge and skill in that order. Keywords: Legal education, excellence, globalization, technology ...

Did He Jump or Was He Pushed? Abductive Practical Reasoning

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Bex, F.J.; Bench-Capon, T.J.M.; Atkinson, K.; Francesconi, E; Sartor, E; Tiscornia, D

2008-01-01

In this paper we present an approach to abductive reasoning in law by examining it in the context of an argumentation scheme for practical reasoning. We present a particular scheme, based on an established scheme for practical reasoning, that can be used to reason abductively about how an agent

The Topic Reasoning and The Ipva on Aircraft and Vessels

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Henrique Silva de Oliveira

2016-11-01

Full Text Available Inspired on Paulo Mendonça and based on argumentative types in Perelman and Olbrechts- Tyteca, this article studies practices surrounding legal debate on collection of property tax on aircraft and vessels. It examines arguments in the vicinity of the non-levy of the tax. It analyzes one topoi of tax practioners: “the Constitution does not create taxes”. Applying the studies  on  the  use  of  “motor  vehicles”  expression  by  STF,  it  examines  how  the  pre- constitutional context contributed to the delimitation of tax jurisdiction in IPVA institution. It compares the lines of argument taken by the leadership of the Judiciary and the Legislature of Brazil.

Construction of Argumentative Discourse in Foucaltian Perspective

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Isabel Cristina Michelan de Azevedo

2016-12-01

Full Text Available This article draws upon the argumentative scheme described by New Rhetoric in order to discuss how the organization of reasonings by association and dissociation can be analyzed in Foucault’s studies (2008 [1969], 2004 [1971] on the constitution of discourse in society, aiming to promote a reflection about the possibilities of analysis of high school students productions and about the organization of argument teaching in basic education. Through an interpretative methodology (ERICKSON, 1986, we seek to understand the discursive movements gathered from productions made during the National Secondary Education Examination in 2004 and to indicate alternatives to develop pedagogical practices committed to the formation of a critical subject. Illustrative analyzes indicate that students prepare reflections authorized by certain discursive formation, task that requires the definition of an identity and the preparing of arguments aligned to the political choices discursively adopted. Thus, it becomes evident the need to diversify the teaching and learning processes when one want to expand the possibilities of the subject to take any stance relative to other positions.

Types of arguments in parents-children discussions:: an argumentative analysis

OpenAIRE

Bova, Antonio; Arcidiacono, Francesco

2014-01-01

This study aims to single out the argumentative strategies most frequently used by parents to convince their children to accept their rules and prescriptions at mealtimes. The results of thestudy show that parents mostly put forward arguments based on the quality and quantity of food to persuade their childern to eat. Less frequently, the parents put forward other types of arguments such as the appeal to consistency, the arguments from expert opinion, and the argument from analogy. Whi...

The canon of pure reason: Kant on the non-dependent establishment of the practical use and the unity of reason

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Adriano Perin

2010-12-01

Full Text Available http://dx.doi.org/10.5007/1677-2954.2008v7n2p137This paper systematically discusses Kant´s argumentation in the Canon of the Critique of pure reason on the matter of the establishment of the practical use and its outcomes for the problem of the unity of reason. Bearing in mind that there is much disagreement in the literature, not only as to the specificity and function of the chapter of the Canon wi thin the various moments of Kant´s philosophy, but also as to its critical importance, the approach centers essentially on Kant´s own argumentation. The aim of this paper is to show that the Canon anticipates an important thesis of the Critique of Practical Reason, i.e., the self-sufficient legitimation of the practical use of reason in relation to its theoretical use, Moreover, is demonstrated that there are important systenatic differences between Kant´s argumentation in the Canon and in the second Critique, which lead to the uniqueness of the treatment of the problem of the unity of reason in the former text. The first part of the paper briefly presents Kant´s position in the pre-critical period on the legitimation of the practical use of reason. Thereafter, it is sustained that Kant´s search in the Canon for a "source of positive cognition" is particularly connected with his critical thesis of a self-sufficient establishment in the Canon. It is argued that, notwithstanding the anticipation of the refered critical thesis, the establishment of the practical use of reason in the Canon requires a theological consideration of morality. The third part of the paper deals with the problem of the unity of theorical and practical uses of reason in position on the establishment of the practical use reason. I come to the conclusion that the Canon guaranteed by means of a transition from the practical to the theoretical use of reason.

Exploring Science Teachers' Argumentation and Personal Epistemology About Global Climate Change

Science.gov (United States)

Liu, Shiyu; Roehrig, Gillian

2017-06-01

This case study investigated the nature of in-service science teachers' argumentation and personal epistemology about global climate change during a 3-year professional development program on climate change education. Qualitative analysis of data from interviews and written assessments revealed that while these teachers grounded their arguments on climate issues in evidence, the evidence was often insufficient to justify their causal claims. Compared with generating arguments for their own views, teachers had more difficulties in constructing evidence-based arguments for alternative perspectives. Moreover, while these teachers shared some similarities in their epistemology about climate science, they varied in their beliefs about specific aspects such as scientists' expertise and the credibility of scientific evidence. Such similarities and distinctions were shown to relate to how teachers used evidence to justify claims in their arguments. The findings also suggested a mismatch between teachers' personal epistemology about science in general and climate science, which was revealed through their argumentation. This work helps to further the ongoing discussions in environmental education about what knowledge and skills teachers need in order to teach climate issues and prepare students for future decision making. It constitutes first steps to facilitate reasoning and argumentation in climate change education and provides important implications for future design of professional development programs.

Social Responsibility and the State's Duty to provide Healthcare: An Islamic Ethico-Legal Perspective.

Science.gov (United States)

Padela, Aasim I

2017-12-01

The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization's (UNESCO) Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights asserts that governments are morally obliged to promote health and to provide access to quality healthcare, essential medicines and adequate nutrition and water to all members of society. According to UNESCO, this obligation is grounded in a moral commitment to promoting fundamental human rights and emerges from the principle of social responsibility. Yet in an era of ethical pluralism and contentions over the universality of human rights conventions, the extent to which the UNESCO Declaration can motivate behaviors and policies rests, at least in part, upon accepting the moral arguments it makes. In this essay I reflect on a state's moral obligation to provide healthcare from the perspective of Islamic moral theology and law. I examine how Islamic ethico-legal conceptual analogues for human rights and communal responsibility, ḥuqūq al-'ibād and farḍ al-kifāyah and other related constructs might be used to advance a moral argument for healthcare provision by the state. Moving from theory to application, I next illustrate how notions of human rights and social responsibility were used by Muslim stakeholders to buttress moral arguments to support American healthcare reform. In this way, the paper advance discourses on a universal bioethics and common morality by bringing into view the concordances and discordances between Islamic ethico-legal constructs and moral arguments advanced by transnational health policy advocates. It also provides insight into applied Islamic bioethics by demonstrating how Islamic ethico-legal values might inform the discursive outputs of Muslim organizations. © 2016 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Modeling crime scenarios in a Bayesian Network

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Vlek, Charlotte; Prakken, Henry; Renooij, Silja; Verheij, Bart

2013-01-01

Legal cases involve reasoning with evidence and with the development of a software support tool in mind, a formal foundation for evidential reasoning is required. Three approaches to evidential reasoning have been prominent in the literature: argumentation, narrative and probabilistic reasoning. In

That’s No Argument! The Dialectic of Non-Argumentation

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Krabbe, Erik C. W.; van Laar, Jan Albert

2015-01-01

What if in discussion the critic refuses to recognize an emotionally expressed (alleged) argument of her interlocutor as an argument, accusing him of having presented no argument at all. In this paper, we shall deal with this reproach, which taken literally amounts to a charge of having committed a

Opposition to legal abortion: challenges and questions.

Science.gov (United States)

Kissling, F

1993-01-01

An analysis of the Roman Catholic Church's arguments against abortion rights suggests that its opposition is grounded more in outmoded views regarding women's roles than in concern for protecting fetal life. The 1st argument raised by Catholics and other anti-abortion forces is that abortion represents the unjustifiable destruction of a human life. A 2nd argument focuses on the status of the fetus as a person from the moment of conception, making abortion murder. A 3rd equates the fetus's potential for personhood with the pregnant woman's actual personhood. Despite the vehement sentiments expressed by Catholic leaders against abortion, the majority of Catholics support legal abortion. The assignment of personhood status to the fetus is contraindicated by actual practice in the Church, where aborted or miscarried products of early pregnancy are not baptized. Also, the Church does not forbid the taking of human life in war or to preserve political freedom. Finally, in countries such as Poland where abortion has been made illegal through religious pressure, there have been drastic cuts in health care and child care programs.

Fostering argumentation-based computer-supported collaborative learning in higher education

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Noroozi, O.

2013-01-01

cum laude graduation (with distinction). In collaborative settings, students of all ages need to learn to clearly explain their informed opinions and give reasons for the way in which they carry out tasks and solve problems. Engaging students in collaborative discussion and argumentation is an

Legal Loopholes and the Politics of Executive Term Limits: Insights from Burundi

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Stef Vandeginste

2016-01-01

Full Text Available The nomination of incumbent Pierre Nkurunziza to stand again for president in the 2015 national elections triggered a political and security crisis in Burundi. A crucial element in the controversy around his third term was the legality of his candidacy. This paper analyses how domestic and international actors responded to the legal loopholes that characterised Burundi’s term-limit legislation. Three responses are distinguished. First, quite paradoxically, an argument was put forward by third-term supporters that stressed constitutional legality, a value usually invoked by third-term opponents. Second, a peace agreement was referred to as a source of legitimacy and as a legal norm. Third, a Constitutional Court ruling was invoked to address the legal loophole. Despite the apparent irrelevance of legal norms in an increasingly authoritarian environment, law significantly shaped the dynamics of the third-term debate and of the wider crisis. The Burundi case also illustrates the limitations of constitutional engineering of democratic governance.

Caspian energy and legal disputes: prospects for settlement

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

Ogutcu, Mehmet

2003-07-01

This paper aims to provide an overview of the Caspian energy prospects and politics on the global scene with a particular emphasis on the legal disputes and their impact on business operations. It also elaborates on the investment environment, the geopolitical stakes and country positions for each key player as they relate to the legal arguments that are randomly advanced according to the perceived national interests. Turkey position as a consumer, transit country and security provider for Caspian energy shipments in relation to other major players active in the region is also of special interest to the paper. The paper puts forth a series of ideas for reaching a settlement of the disputes in the Caspian region. (author)

Caspian energy and legal disputes: prospects for settlement

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Ogutcu, Mehmet

2003-01-01

This paper aims to provide an overview of the Caspian energy prospects and politics on the global scene with a particular emphasis on the legal disputes and their impact on business operations. It also elaborates on the investment environment, the geopolitical stakes and country positions for each key player as they relate to the legal arguments that are randomly advanced according to the perceived national interests. Turkey position as a consumer, transit country and security provider for Caspian energy shipments in relation to other major players active in the region is also of special interest to the paper. The paper puts forth a series of ideas for reaching a settlement of the disputes in the Caspian region. (author)

Development and necessary norms of reasoning

Science.gov (United States)

Markovits, Henry

2014-01-01

The question of whether reasoning can, or should, be described by a single normative model is an important one. In the following, I combine epistemological considerations taken from Piaget’s notion of genetic epistemology, a hypothesis about the role of reasoning in communication and developmental data to argue that some basic logical principles are in fact highly normative. I argue here that explicit, analytic human reasoning, in contrast to intuitive reasoning, uniformly relies on a form of validity that allows distinguishing between valid and invalid arguments based on the existence of counterexamples to conclusions. PMID:24904501

Uses of Extra-Legal Sources in "Amicus Curiae" Briefs Submitted in "Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin"

Science.gov (United States)

Marin, Patricia; Horn, Catherine L.; Miksch, Karen; Garces, Liliana M.; Yun, John T.

2018-01-01

As the political arena becomes increasingly polarized, the legal arena is playing a more important role in the creation of education policy in the United States. One critical stage in the legal process for such efforts is at briefing where "amici curiae," or friends-of-the-court, may introduce additional arguments for the court to…

Observing Reasonable Consumers.

Science.gov (United States)

Silber, Norman I.

1991-01-01

Although courts and legislators usually set legal standards that correspond to empirical knowledge of human behavior, recent developments in behavioral psychology have led courts to appreciate the limits and errors in consumer decision making. "Reasonable consumer" standards that are congruent with cognitive reality should be developed.…

Implementation of a Curriculum-Integrated Computer Game for Introducing Scientific Argumentation

Science.gov (United States)

Wallon, Robert C.; Jasti, Chandana; Lauren, Hillary Z. G.; Hug, Barbara

2017-11-01

Argumentation has been emphasized in recent US science education reform efforts (NGSS Lead States 2013; NRC 2012), and while existing studies have investigated approaches to introducing and supporting argumentation (e.g., McNeill and Krajcik in Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(1), 53-78, 2008; Kang et al. in Science Education, 98(4), 674-704, 2014), few studies have investigated how game-based approaches may be used to introduce argumentation to students. In this paper, we report findings from a design-based study of a teacher's use of a computer game intended to introduce the claim, evidence, reasoning (CER) framework (McNeill and Krajcik 2012) for scientific argumentation. We studied the implementation of the game over two iterations of development in a high school biology teacher's classes. The results of this study include aspects of enactment of the activities and student argument scores. We found the teacher used the game in aspects of explicit instruction of argumentation during both iterations, although the ways in which the game was used differed. Also, students' scores in the second iteration were significantly higher than the first iteration. These findings support the notion that students can learn argumentation through a game, especially when used in conjunction with explicit instruction and support in student materials. These findings also highlight the importance of analyzing classroom implementation in studies of game-based learning.

Renewable energies in the Brazilian legal system: a constitutional vision; As energias renovaveis no ordenamento juridico brasileiro: uma visao constitucional

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

Lanzillo, Anderson Souza da Silva; Xavier, Yanko Marcius de Alencar [Agencia Nacional do Petroleo, Gas Natural e Biocombustiveis (ANP), Brasilia, DF (Brazil). Programa de Recursos Humanos em Direito do Petroleo, Gas Natural e Biocombustiveis

2009-08-15

The focus of this article is the inclusion of renewable energy in Brazil under the legal institutional aspect from the Brazilian Constitution of 1988. The legal perspective, set up three central pillars of questions: what questions the renewable energy in Brazil put in the legal treatment of the theme? What constitutional legal instruments for the management of renewable energy? Which legal instruments that would be recommended, as policy instruments, for the inclusion of renewable energy in Brazil? With these questions, we will develop the argument of the text.

Comment: Legal Liability as Climate Change Policy

OpenAIRE

Hilary Sigman

2007-01-01

Several U.S. states have attempted to use of legal liability imposed on greenhouse gas emitters as a public policy instrument for climate change. This brief comment considers the desirability of this approach, focusing on three possible roles for climate change liability: as a source of compensation, as a direct influence on greenhouse gas concentrations, and as a means to facilitate the adoption of ex ante public policies to control greenhouse gases. The strongest argument for liability may ...

Informal Fallacies as Cognitive Heuristics in Public Health Reasoning

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Louise Cummings

2014-02-01

Full Text Available The public must make assessments of a range of health-related issues. However, these assessments require scientific know-ledge which is often lacking or ineffectively utilized by the public. Lay people must use whatever cognitive resources are at their disposal to come to judgement on these issues. It will be contended that a group of arguments—so-called informal fallacies—are a valuable cognitive resource in this regard. These arguments serve as cognitive heuristics which facilitate reasoning when knowledge is limited or beyond the grasp of reasoners. The results of an investigation into the use of these arguments by the public are reported.

A Textbook Argument: Definitions of Argument in Leading Composition Textbooks

Science.gov (United States)

Knoblauch, A. Abby

2011-01-01

This essay examines the definitions and practices of argument perpetuated by popular composition textbooks, illustrating how even those texts that appear to forward expansive notions of argument ultimately limit it to an intent to persuade. In doing so, they help perpetuate constricted practices of argument within undergraduate composition…

Enhancing Historical Reasoning: A Strategy Including Formative Assessment with Systematic Continuous Feedback

Science.gov (United States)

Méndez, Sergio; Tirado, Felipe

2016-01-01

Learning History promotes students' reasoning. According to Van Drie & Van Boxtel (2008), historical reasoning involves six elements: substantive concepts, metaconcepts, asking historical questions, using sources, contextualization, and argumentation. Although there are didactic strategies that promote historical reasoning, these do not…

Ethical and Legal Issues in Gestational Surrogacy.

Science.gov (United States)

Casella, Claudia; Capasso, Emanuele; Terracciano, Lucia; Delbon, Paola; Fedeli, Piergiorgio; Salzano, Francesco Antonio; Policino, Fabio; Niola, Massimo

2018-01-01

This study originated from events that occurred in 2014 in an Italian hospital, where the embryos of a couple, obtained by means of homologous insemination, were mistakenly implanted into the uterus of another woman who, along with her husband, underwent the same treatment. Faced with this serious adverse circumstance, that gives rise to ethical and legal issues, the authors conducted a comparative examination of how to consider the division of maternity (between biological mother and uterine mother) and the related division of paternity (between genetic father and legal father, husband or partner of the gestational mother). Some preliminary observations are made concerning parenthood and filiation within the context of currently applicable Italian law. The following is a detailed analysis of the arguments in favour of the parental figures involved (gestational mother/genetic mother).

No, we don't think our doctors are out to get us: responding to the straw man distortions of disability rights arguments against assisted suicide.

Science.gov (United States)

Gill, Carol J

2010-01-01

The arguments that disability rights advocates present in opposition to legalized assisted suicide are frequently misconstrued in public debate. The goal of this paper is to identify and analyze key "straw man" fallacies about the disability rights opposition in order to clarify this position and the factors that contribute to its distortion. The author adopts a first-person perspective as a disability scholar/activist who has participated in "right to die" debates for over two decades. Three possible barriers that potentially impede comprehension of disability rights arguments are discussed. Prominent fallacies that assisted suicide proponents attribute to disability rights opponents are analyzed in relation to the dynamics of the assisted suicide debate, social views of disability and incurable illness, and available evidence. The author's position is that disability rights arguments against legalized assisted suicide contribute a complex intellectual and experience-based perspective to the debate that can illuminate immediate and distal consequences of altering public policy. Copyright © 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Peacetime Reprisals Under Article 51: An Argument for Legal Legitimacy in Cases of Terrorism

National Research Council Canada - National Science Library

Coffey, Holly S

1997-01-01

This thesis proposes a change to Article 51 of the UN Charter. The use of peacetime reprisals should be afforded the same legal legitimacy under the Charter as are acts characterized as self-defense in situations of terrorism...

Legal regime of human activities in outer space law

Science.gov (United States)

Golda, Carlo

1994-01-01

Current developments in space activities increasingly involve the presence of humans on board spacecraft and, in the near future, on the Moon, on Mars, on board Space Stations, etc. With respect to these challenges, the political and legal issues connected to the status of astronauts are largely unclear and require a new doctrinal attention. In the same way, many legal and political questions remain open in the structure of future space crews: the need for international standards in the definition and training of astronauts, etc.; but, first of all, an international uniform legal definition of astronauts. Moreover, the legal structure for human life and operations in outer space can be a new and relevant paradigm for the definition of similar rules in all the situations and environments in which humans are involved in extreme frontiers. The present article starts from an overview on the existing legal and political definitions of 'astronauts', moving to the search of a more useful definition. This is followed by an analysis of the concrete problems created by human space activities, and the legal and political responses to them (the need for a code of conduct; the structure of the crew and the existing rules in the US and ex-USSR; the new legal theories on the argument; the definition and structure of a code of conduct; the next legal problems in fields such as privacy law, communications law, business law, criminal law, etc.).

Legal liability and claims for the hotel industry

OpenAIRE

Dimcho Todorov

2017-01-01

The paper presents a review of various aspects of legal liability and claims to hotel management arising in the hotel industry in the context of the legal framework and possible legal consequences for hotels and other types of commercial accommodation establishments. The main reasons for accidents' occurrence in the hotel industry are chronologically traced. Possible claims to the hotel management are also presented in detail. The problem with workplace discrimination, which is considered as ...

THE FUNCTION OF LEGAL REASONITY IN COURT JUDGEMENT (MODEL ON FINDING THE LAW REFLECTY PANCASILA VALUE

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Deka Rachman Budihanto

2017-09-01

Full Text Available Legal research is a process to determine the rule of law, principles of law and legal doctrines in order to address the legal issues at hand. This study using a type of normative juridical (legal research. Rechtvinding understanding in Indonesian as legal discovery (translated literally could mislead rechtvinding function is to find concrete norm to associate the relevant legal facts. Adhering to the understanding of the rechtvinding the judge in carrying out its functions prosecute a legal case can not be separated from efforts to find concrete norms to be linked to the fact the law. Furthermore, when the facts of law has no grounding norms that govern mutatis mutandis thus not regulated in the rules of positive law and customary law. Scholasticism and dialectic method is used as a support hermeneutic interpretation of legal facts to me recht construction of a new legal norm normative ideas should not be separated from Idee recht itself. Rechvinding model contained in the provisions of the Basic Law of Judicial Authority Article 1 in Conjunction with Article 5, Article 10 in conjunction with Article 50 1 for the model Rechtvinding is the approach taken by norma series is a concept of morals and justice and practices considered society as law and the criminal law model rechtvinding is also banned norma concrete (new, to assess the actions (act so that an exit permit from the actions that have not been regulated in the act so that such actions are not punished.

Vaccine Hesitancy in Discussion Forums: Computer-Assisted Argument Mining with Topic Models.

Science.gov (United States)

Skeppstedt, Maria; Kerren, Andreas; Stede, Manfred

2018-01-01

Arguments used when vaccination is debated on Internet discussion forums might give us valuable insights into reasons behind vaccine hesitancy. In this study, we applied automatic topic modelling on a collection of 943 discussion posts in which vaccine was debated, and six distinct discussion topics were detected by the algorithm. When manually coding the posts ranked as most typical for these six topics, a set of semantically coherent arguments were identified for each extracted topic. This indicates that topic modelling is a useful method for automatically identifying vaccine-related discussion topics and for identifying debate posts where these topics are discussed. This functionality could facilitate manual coding of salient arguments, and thereby form an important component in a system for computer-assisted coding of vaccine-related discussions.

Inductive Reasoning About Effectful Data Types

DEFF Research Database (Denmark)

Filinski, Andrzej; Støvring, Kristian

2007-01-01

We present a pair of reasoning principles, definition and proof by rigid induction, which can be seen as proper generalizations of lazy-datatype induction to monadic effects other than partiality. We further show how these principles can be integrated into logical-relations arguments, and obtain...

Peculiarities of the Nature and Status of the Russian Presidential Administration: Historical, Political and Legal Overview

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Anton Vladimirovich Zuykov

2018-03-01

Full Text Available The Presidential Administration in the Russian Federation has never been just an adminicular mechanism of the head of state. Unlike its western analogs, it has always possessed an incomparably large resource of power. While presidents were changed, the personal stuff, structure and authorities of this body were also changed, but its central place in the management system of the Russian state remained stable. The Administration of the President of the Russian Federation is an institution, whose legal status does not have a clear legal shape. Not without reason the journalists, as well as lawyers, political scientists and historians sometimes call it the shadow government or the secret order. However, the legal nature of the administration of the President of the Russian Federation is not quite clear. Even the name "Administration" is often misleading: whether the Administration of the President of the Russian Federation may be considered the executive power or the public administration in a wider sense? This and other disputes about the nature of the Presidential Administration of the Russian Federation and its legal status have arisen in the expert community with the beginning of complex work on the constitutional project, and are still ongoing today. In this regard, the author of this article decided to make one of the first attempts in the country to investigate what the Administration of the President of the Russian Federation really is, what are the problems associated with its functioning, and whether there are legal means to resolve them at the present stage. To answer these questions, the author thoroughly analyzes the models and arguments proposed at different stages of the development of the new Russia, and correlates them with the basic constitutional principles.

Intelligent Flowcharting Developmental Approach to Legal Knowledge Based System

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Nitin Balaji Bilgi

2011-10-01

Full Text Available The basic aim of this research, described in this paper is to develop a hybrid legal expert system/ knowledge based system, with specific reference to the transfer of property act, within the Indian legal system which is often in demand. In this paper the authors discuss an traditional approach to combining two types of reasoning methodologies, Rule Based Reasoning (RBR and Case Based Reasoning (CBR. In RBR module we have interpreted and implemented rules that occur in legal statutes of the Transfer of property act. In the CBR module we have an implementation to find the related cases. The VisiRule software made available by Logic Programming Associates is used in the development of RBR part this expert system. The authors have used java Net Beans for development of CBR. VisiRule is a decision charting tool, in which the rules are defined by a combination of graphical shapes and pieces of text, and produces rules.

The sight of the peacock's tail makes me sick: the early arguments on sexual selection.

Science.gov (United States)

Hiraiwa-Hasegawa, M

2000-03-01

Why does a peacock have a beautiful train, while a peahen is sober without such flamboyance? Darwin proposed the theory of sexual selection to explain the differences between the sexes of the same species. Recently the study of sexual selection has been one of the most flourishing areas in evolutionary biology. However, the theory met with great resistance from biologists since the publication of the idea and the history of the theory included a lot of misunderstanding and confusion. There are several reasons for this. First, classical Darwinism failed to recognize social competition as an important selective force. Second, the good-for-the-species argument, which persisted in the days after Darwin, made the sexual selection argument more difficult to under-stand. Compared to the discussions on animals, Darwin's argument on human sex differences is not satisfactory. The reason probably lies in the debate over human racial differences which prevailed in the 19th century.

Logically Incorrect Arguments

Czech Academy of Sciences Publication Activity Database

Svoboda, Vladimír; Peregrin, Jaroslav

2016-01-01

Roč. 30, č. 3 (2016), s. 263-287 ISSN 0920-427X R&D Projects: GA ČR(CZ) GA13-21076S Institutional support: RVO:67985955 Keywords : argumentation * logical form * incorrect argument * correct arguments Subject RIV: AA - Philosophy ; Religion Impact factor: 0.689, year: 2016

Freedom and Equality in a Pluralist Society: An Explanation and Defence of the Public Reason View

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Elvio Baccarini

2015-01-01

Full Text Available The paper is dedicated to replies to Christiano’s criticism of Rawlsian public reason. Although Christiano’s criticism is successful in relation to one possible interpretation of the public reason view, a better and more fructuous interpretation of the public reason view is at the disposition of the Rawlsian project. This view of public reason is deliberately an idealization. It shows how public justification would function in a well-ordered society where citizens are committed to liberal values. The shared reasons relevant for public justification are represented by the ideal of society as a fair system of cooperation between free and equal citizens, as well as by the three features of the liberal conceptions of justice (basic rights and liberties, their priority, and the means to use them. In virtue of this view of public reason, it avoids Christiano’s objection of the utopianism of shared reasons, and it replies to the inequality argument, as well as to the generality and vagueness objection, and the inconsistency argument. The advantages of the proposal in the view of public reason, in comparison to Christiano’s proceduralist democratic proposal, are shown in the reply to the inequality argument.

Student Difficulties in Socio-Scientific Argumentation and Decision-Making Research Findings: Crossing the Borders of Two Research Lines

Science.gov (United States)

Acar, Omer; Turkmen, Lutfullah; Roychoudhury, Anita

2010-01-01

Students' poor argumentation in the context of socio-scientific issues has become a concern in science education. Identified problems associated with student argumentation in socio-scientific issues are misevaluation of evidence, naive nature of science conceptualizations, and inappropriate use of value-based reasoning. In this theoretical paper,…

Inductive Reasoning in Patients with Paranoid Type Schizophrenia

OpenAIRE

Mehmet Emrah Karadere; Yasir Safak; Halime Seyma Ozcelik; Emre Demir; Mehmet Hakan Turkcapar

2017-01-01

The goal of our study is to evaluate the decision making and reasoning of the paranoid type schizophrenic patients, and their confidence in reasoning and perseverance in keeping to their decisions via using Reasoning with Inductive Argument Test (RIAT). Thirty-two delusional patients and 30 healthy volunteers were included in the study. After the diagnostic interview was conducted by SCID-I to the patients who were asked to participate in the study, RIAT test was applied by the interviewe...

Ethical and Legal Issues in Gestational Surrogacy

Science.gov (United States)

Casella, Claudia; Capasso, Emanuele; Terracciano, Lucia; Delbon, Paola; Fedeli, Piergiorgio; Salzano, Francesco Antonio; Policino, Fabio; Niola, Massimo

2018-01-01

Abstract This study originated from events that occurred in 2014 in an Italian hospital, where the embryos of a couple, obtained by means of homologous insemination, were mistakenly implanted into the uterus of another woman who, along with her husband, underwent the same treatment. Faced with this serious adverse circumstance, that gives rise to ethical and legal issues, the authors conducted a comparative examination of how to consider the division of maternity (between biological mother and uterine mother) and the related division of paternity (between genetic father and legal father, husband or partner of the gestational mother). Some preliminary observations are made concerning parenthood and filiation within the context of currently applicable Italian law. The following is a detailed analysis of the arguments in favour of the parental figures involved (gestational mother/genetic mother). PMID:29675478

The Dimensionality of Reasoning: Inductive and Deductive Inference can be Explained by a Single Process.

Science.gov (United States)

Hayes, Brett K; Stephens, Rachel G; Ngo, Jeremy; Dunn, John C

2018-02-01

Three-experiments examined the number of qualitatively different processing dimensions needed to account for inductive and deductive reasoning. In each study, participants were presented with arguments that varied in logical validity and consistency with background knowledge (believability), and evaluated them according to deductive criteria (whether the conclusion was necessarily true given the premises) or inductive criteria (whether the conclusion was plausible given the premises). We examined factors including working memory load (Experiments 1 and 2), individual working memory capacity (Experiments 1 and 2), and decision time (Experiment 3), which according to dual-processing theories, modulate the contribution of heuristic and analytic processes to reasoning. A number of empirical dissociations were found. Argument validity affected deduction more than induction. Argument believability affected induction more than deduction. Lower working memory capacity reduced sensitivity to argument validity and increased sensitivity to argument believability, especially under induction instructions. Reduced decision time led to decreased sensitivity to argument validity. State-trace analyses of each experiment, however, found that only a single underlying dimension was required to explain patterns of inductive and deductive judgments. These results show that the dissociations, which have traditionally been seen as supporting dual-processing models of reasoning, are consistent with a single-process model that assumes a common evidentiary scale for induction and deduction. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all rights reserved).

Examining Elementary Students' Development of Oral and Written Argumentation Practices Through Argument-Based Inquiry

Science.gov (United States)

Chen, Ying-Chih; Hand, Brian; Park, Soonhye

2016-05-01

Argumentation, and the production of scientific arguments are critical elements of inquiry that are necessary for helping students become scientifically literate through engaging them in constructing and critiquing ideas. This case study employed a mixed methods research design to examine the development in 5th grade students' practices of oral and written argumentation from one unit to another over 16 weeks utilizing the science writing heuristic approach. Data sources included five rounds of whole-class discussion focused on group presentations of arguments that occurred over eleven class periods; students' group writings; interviews with six target students and the teacher; and the researcher's field notes. The results revealed five salient trends in students' development of oral and written argumentative practices over time: (1) Students came to use more critique components as they participated in more rounds of whole-class discussion focused on group presentations of arguments; (2) by challenging each other's arguments, students came to focus on the coherence of the argument and the quality of evidence; (3) students came to use evidence to defend, support, and reject arguments; (4) the quality of students' writing continuously improved over time; and (5) students connected oral argument skills to written argument skills as they had opportunities to revise their writing after debating and developed awareness of the usefulness of critique from peers. Given the development in oral argumentative practices and the quality of written arguments over time, this study indicates that students' development of oral and written argumentative practices is positively related to each other. This study suggests that argumentative practices should be framed through both a social and epistemic understanding of argument-utilizing talk and writing as vehicles to create norms of these complex practices.

Combining conceptual graphs and argumentation for aiding in the teleexpertise.

Science.gov (United States)

Doumbouya, Mamadou Bilo; Kamsu-Foguem, Bernard; Kenfack, Hugues; Foguem, Clovis

2015-08-01

Current medical information systems are too complex to be meaningfully exploited. Hence there is a need to develop new strategies for maximising the exploitation of medical data to the benefit of medical professionals. It is against this backdrop that we want to propose a tangible contribution by providing a tool which combines conceptual graphs and Dung׳s argumentation system in order to assist medical professionals in their decision making process. The proposed tool allows medical professionals to easily manipulate and visualise queries and answers for making decisions during the practice of teleexpertise. The knowledge modelling is made using an open application programming interface (API) called CoGui, which offers the means for building structured knowledge bases with the dedicated functionalities of graph-based reasoning via retrieved data from different institutions (hospitals, national security centre, and nursing homes). The tool that we have described in this study supports a formal traceable structure of the reasoning with acceptable arguments to elucidate some ethical problems that occur very often in the telemedicine domain. Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Legal and political obstacles to smoke-free regulation in Minnesota regions.

Science.gov (United States)

Cork, Kerry; Forman, Carolyn

2008-12-01

As communities move toward statewide smoke-free regulation, progress is often stymied by legal and political challenges that arise when multiple cities and counties share regulatory power within what is, for economic purposes, a single population center. Political challenges are exacerbated by legal inconsistencies and uncertainties, such as confusing and conflicting lawmaking power in boards of health, cities or counties, and diverse procedures and timelines for adopting and amending ordinances. Surprisingly little research is available about the legal and political obstacles communities face in regulating tobacco on a regional basis. Researchers used case study methodology to analyze legal and political challenges that seven multi-jurisdictional Minnesota regions faced in smoke-free ordinance campaigns between 2000 and 2006, to examine the approaches regulatory authorities took in each of these communities, and to identify strategies to help public health advocates, health organizations, policymakers, and legal professionals anticipate, avoid, and address these obstacles. Legal impediments included confusing rules for passing smoke-free laws via ballot measures (initiatives and referenda); distracting lawsuits; and conflicts over legal jurisdiction. Political challenges included the recurrent argument for regional consistency, protracted timelines, pending legislation and elections, and mayoral vetoes. Legal and political challenges similar to those in this study appear in smoke-free campaigns across the U.S. By recognizing the risks posed by these obstacles, advocates will be better prepared to advance smoke-free policies effectively.

Group Emotions: The Social and Cognitive Functions of Emotions in Argumentation

Science.gov (United States)

Polo, Claire; Lund, Kristine; Plantin, Christian; Niccolai, Gerald P.

2016-01-01

The learning sciences of today recognize the tri-dimensional nature of learning as involving cognitive, social and emotional phenomena. However, many computer-supported argumentation systems still fail in addressing the socio-emotional aspects of group reasoning, perhaps due to a lack of an integrated theoretical vision of how these three…

Truth Matters: Teaching Young Students to Search for the Most Reasonable Answer

Science.gov (United States)

Reznitskaya, Alina; Wilkinson, Ian A. G.

2018-01-01

Learning how to formulate, comprehend, and evaluate arguments is an essential part of helping students develop the ability to make better, more reasonable judgments. The Common Core identified argumentation as a fundamental life skill that is broadly important for the literate person. According to the authors, having students engage in an inquiry…

Legal Approaches to Online Arbitration: Opportunities and Challenges in Indonesia

OpenAIRE

Fitrianingrum, Agustina; Shahrullah, Rina Shahriyani; Syarief, Elza

2016-01-01

Abstract Online arbitration is one of the mechanisms to settle business disputes. Using online arbitration in Indonesia is challenging because the Indonesian arbitration law (Law No.30 of 1999 concerning Arbitration and Alternative Dispute Resolution) does not specifcally deal with online arbitration. This research provides arguments and evidences that the relevant Indonesian national laws support the use of online arbitration. It adopts a normative legal research with a qualitative approa...

Argumentation Schema and the Myside Bias in Written Argumentation

Science.gov (United States)

Wolfe, Christopher R.; Britt, M. Anne; Butler, Jodie A.

2009-01-01

This article describes a cognitive argumentation schema for written arguments and presents three empirical studies on the "myside" bias--the tendency to ignore or exclude evidence against one's position. Study 1 examined the consequences of conceding, rebutting, and denying other-side information. Rebuttal led to higher ratings of…

Deconstructing climate misinformation to identify reasoning errors

Science.gov (United States)

Cook, John; Ellerton, Peter; Kinkead, David

2018-02-01

Misinformation can have significant societal consequences. For example, misinformation about climate change has confused the public and stalled support for mitigation policies. When people lack the expertise and skill to evaluate the science behind a claim, they typically rely on heuristics such as substituting judgment about something complex (i.e. climate science) with judgment about something simple (i.e. the character of people who speak about climate science) and are therefore vulnerable to misleading information. Inoculation theory offers one approach to effectively neutralize the influence of misinformation. Typically, inoculations convey resistance by providing people with information that counters misinformation. In contrast, we propose inoculating against misinformation by explaining the fallacious reasoning within misleading denialist claims. We offer a strategy based on critical thinking methods to analyse and detect poor reasoning within denialist claims. This strategy includes detailing argument structure, determining the truth of the premises, and checking for validity, hidden premises, or ambiguous language. Focusing on argument structure also facilitates the identification of reasoning fallacies by locating them in the reasoning process. Because this reason-based form of inoculation is based on general critical thinking methods, it offers the distinct advantage of being accessible to those who lack expertise in climate science. We applied this approach to 42 common denialist claims and find that they all demonstrate fallacious reasoning and fail to refute the scientific consensus regarding anthropogenic global warming. This comprehensive deconstruction and refutation of the most common denialist claims about climate change is designed to act as a resource for communicators and educators who teach climate science and/or critical thinking.

Argument Construction in Understanding Noncovalent Interactions: A Comparison of Two Argumentation Frameworks

Science.gov (United States)

Cooper, A. Kat; Oliver-Hoyo, M. T.

2016-01-01

Argument construction is a valuable ability for explaining scientific phenomena and introducing argumentation skills as part of a curriculum can greatly enhance student understanding by promoting self-reflection on the topic under investigation. This article aims to use argument construction as a technique to support an activity designed to…

Using the Cognitive Apprenticeship Web-Based Argumentation System to Improve Argumentation Instruction

Science.gov (United States)

Tsai, Chun-Yen; Jack, Brady Michael; Huang, Tai-Chu; Yang, Jin-Tan

2012-01-01

This study investigated how the instruction of argumentation skills could be promoted by using an online argumentation system. This system entitled "Cognitive Apprenticeship Web-based Argumentation" (CAWA) system was based on cognitive apprenticeship model. One hundred eighty-nine fifth grade students took part in this study. A quasi-experimental…

Moving Beyond Drinking to Have a Good Time: a Person-Centered Approach to Identifying Reason Typologies in Legal-Aged College Student Drinkers.

Science.gov (United States)

Weybright, Elizabeth H; Cooper, Brittany R; Beckmeyer, Jonathon; Bumpus, Matthew F; Hill, Laura G; Agley, Jon

2016-08-01

Alcohol use, reasons for use, and consequences of use continue to be a major concern in college student populations. This is especially true for students of legal drinking age who may experience different reasons for and greater negative consequences of alcohol use than students under 21 years old. Although multiple studies have used person-centered approaches to understand motivations for and ultimately prevent alcohol use, few have identified multiple typologies of reasons for alcohol use. The current study used latent class analysis to identify homogeneous subtypes of reasons for alcohol use and how classification was associated with alcohol-related consequences in college students aged 21 years old and older (N = 2300) from the 2013 Indiana College Substance Use Survey. Four profiles of reasons for alcohol use emerged across males and females: social drinkers, feel good drinkers, relaxed escaping drinkers, and emotion coping drinkers. Although the likelihood of consequences differed across gender, the emotion coping drinkers were more likely to experience all negative consequences, suggesting that it was a high-risk class. In general, this pattern of risk continued with the feel good drinkers and female relaxed escaping drinkers. These results can help optimize college substance use prevention and intervention efforts to (1) identify and understand characteristics of high- and low-risk student drinkers and (2) tailor the content of interventions to those specific profiles resulting in more effective approaches to reducing alcohol use.

INTERACTION OF EUROPEAN AND RUSSIAN LEGAL CONSCIOUSNESS

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

A. Tyrtyshny

2015-01-01

Full Text Available This article provides an overview of certain ideologemes of Western (European and Russian legal consciousness – prominent works of Ivan Ilyin and Duncan Kennedy are taken as examples. The article analyzes the tabula rasa principle and its place in legal consciousness. We use legal scholarship, judicial practice and opinion polls to examine the relationship between legal consciousness and the lack of trust in Russian courts, as well as their inefficiency from the point of view of public opinion. There are a number of shocking cases of torture of innocent people by the Russian police. Why is this so? The answer lies in the legal consciousness of police officers and of judges. This is something that has been inherited from the Soviet period. It is completely different from the Western legal consciousness, one of the key features of which is denial of authority. The critical legal studies branch of American legal realism almost denies the very existence of law, and, perhaps for this reason, American culture is less open to abuses like torture. At the same time, there is no possibility to shift legal consciousness immediately, the tabula rasa principle does not work. The final objective of the article is to provide a perspective on the reform of higher legal education and its relation to legal consciousness and legal anthropology. We propose that a greater part of the university curriculum is devoted to legal anthropology.

Why the Difference Between Explanation and Argument Matters to Science Education

Science.gov (United States)

Brigandt, Ingo

2016-05-01

Contributing to the recent debate on whether or not explanations ought to be differentiated from arguments, this article argues that the distinction matters to science education. I articulate the distinction in terms of explanations and arguments having to meet different standards of adequacy. Standards of explanatory adequacy are important because they correspond to what counts as a good explanation in a science classroom, whereas a focus on evidence-based argumentation can obscure such standards of what makes an explanation explanatory. I provide further reasons for the relevance of not conflating explanations with arguments (and having standards of explanatory adequacy in view). First, what guides the adoption of the particular standards of explanatory adequacy that are relevant in a scientific case is the explanatory aim pursued in this context. Apart from explanatory aims being an important aspect of the nature of science, including explanatory aims in classroom instruction also promotes students seeing explanations as more than facts, and engages them in developing explanations as responses to interesting explanatory problems. Second, it is of relevance to science curricula that science aims at intervening in natural processes, not only for technological applications, but also as part of experimental discovery. Not any argument enables intervention in nature, as successful intervention specifically presupposes causal explanations. Students can fruitfully explore in the classroom how an explanatory account suggests different options for intervention.

A Reinforcement Learning Approach to Improve the Argument Selection Effectiveness in Argumentation-based Negotiation

OpenAIRE

Amandi, Analia Adriana; Monteserin, Ariel José

2016-01-01

Argument selection is considered the essence of the strategy in argumentation-based negotiation. An agent, which is arguing during a negotiation, must decide what arguments are the best to persuade the opponent. In fact, in each negotiation step, the agent must select an argument from a set of candidate arguments by applying some selection policy. Following this policy, the agent observes some factors of the negotiation context, for instance: trust in the opponent and expected utility of the...

Reasons of the heart: emotion, rationality, and the "wisdom of repugnance".

Science.gov (United States)

Kaebnick, Gregory E

2008-01-01

Much work in bioethics tries to sidestep bedrock questions about moral values. This is fine if we agree on our values; arguments about human enhancement suggest we do not. One bedrock question underlying these arguments concerns the role of emotion in morality: worries about enhancement are derided as emotional and thus irrational. In fact, both emotion and reason are integral to all moral judgment.

The Ethics of Argumentation

OpenAIRE

Vasco Correia

2012-01-01

Normative theories of argumentation tend to assume that logical and dialectical rules suffice to ensure the rationality of argumentative discourse. Yet, in everyday debates people use arguments that seem valid in light of such rules but nonetheless biased and tendentious. This article seeks to show that the rationality of argumentation can only be fully promoted if we take into account its ethical dimension. To substantiate this claim, I review some of the empirical evidence indicating that p...

Argumentation and development of reflective thinking / Argumentação e desenvolvimento do pensamento reflexivo

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Selma Leitão

2007-01-01

Full Text Available The main goal of this article is to offer a perspective from which the relations between argumentation and reflection can be investigated. The main argument proposed is that the same semiotic-dialogic mechanism that constitutes argumentation (supporting a view with reasons, considering objections and responding to opposition has a built-in capacity to place the arguer's thinking in a metacognitive framework. Together, they are effective in orienting the thinking a person does towards examining the bases and limits of his/her own thoughts. They do so by introducing into the person's psychological field a new object for reflection the arguer's own thoughts. At the second section of the article, the analysis of some fragments of children's argumentation produced in classroom illustrates how the framework proposed can be used in investigating the development of self-regulated reflection.

Argumentation in undergraduate chemistry laboratories

Science.gov (United States)

Walker, Joi Phelps

To address the need for reform in undergraduate science education a new instructional model called Argument-Driven Inquiry (ADI) was developed and then implemented in a undergraduate chemistry course at a community college in the southeastern United States (Sampson, Walker, & Grooms, 2009; Walker, Sampson, & Zimmerman, in press). The ADI instructional model is designed to give a more central place to argumentation and the role of argument in the social construction of scientific knowledge. This research investigated the growth in the quality of the student generated arguments and the scientific argumentation that took place over the course of a semester. Students enrolled in two sections of General Chemistry I laboratory at the community college participated in this study. The students worked in collaborative groups of three or four. The students were given a variation of the same performance task three times during the semester in order to measure individual ability to use evidence and justify their choice of evidence with appropriate rationale. Five ADI investigations took place during the semester and the laboratory reports for each were collected from each student and the argument section of each report was scored. All the student groups were video recorded five times during the semester as they generated and evaluated arguments and the quality of the group argumentation was assessed using an instrument called the Assessment of Scientific Argumentation in the Classroom (ASAC) observation protocol. As time was the independent variable in this study a repeated measure ANOVA was used to evaluate the significance of student improvement in each area (argumentation, written argument and performance task) over the course of the semester (Trochim, 1999). In addition, a multiple regression analysis was conducted to evaluate how well the ASAC scores predicted individual scores on both the performance task and the written arguments (Green & Salkind, 2005). There was

28 CFR 32.14 - PSOB Office determination.

Science.gov (United States)

2010-07-01

...'s failure (without reasonable justification or excuse) to pursue in timely fashion the determination..., or other non-physical evidence (such as medical-history records, as appropriate) and legal arguments...

Stanovich's arguments against the "adaptive rationality" project: An assessment.

Science.gov (United States)

Polonioli, Andrea

2015-02-01

This paper discusses Stanovich's appeal to individual differences in reasoning and decision-making to undermine the "adaptive rationality" project put forth by Gigerenzer and his co-workers. I discuss two different arguments based on Stanovich's research. First, heterogeneity in the use of heuristics seems to be at odds with the adaptationist background of the project. Second, the existence of correlations between cognitive ability and susceptibility to cognitive bias suggests that the "standard picture of rationality" (Stein, 1996, 4) is normatively adequate. I argue that, as matters stand, none of the arguments can be seen as fully compelling. Nevertheless, my discussion is not only critical of Stanovich's research, as I also show that (and how) his research can push forward the so-called "rationality debate" by encouraging greater theoretical and experimental work. Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Argumentativeness and Resistance to Persuasion.

Science.gov (United States)

Levine, Timothy R.; Badger, Eugenia E.

1993-01-01

Examines college students' level of argumentativeness in relation to persuasion. Finds that highly argumentative individuals experienced more attitude change than their less argumentative counterparts. Shows that topic had no effect upon attitude change and that topic did not interact with argumentativeness. (SR)

Argumentation Theory. [A Selected Annotated Bibliography].

Science.gov (United States)

Benoit, William L.

Materials dealing with aspects of argumentation theory are cited in this annotated bibliography. The 50 citations are organized by topic as follows: (1) argumentation; (2) the nature of argument; (3) traditional perspectives on argument; (4) argument diagrams; (5) Chaim Perelman's theory of rhetoric; (6) the evaluation of argument; (7) argument…

Refiguring the Public, Political, and Personal in Current Danish Exclusionary Reasoning

DEFF Research Database (Denmark)

Hervik, Peter

2018-01-01

Hervik uses the new concept of “fractal logic” as a way to explain how scaling takes place in Danish exclusionary reasoning, in news articles, web commentaries, blogs, and Facebook about Muslims. Through two incidents in Denmark, an amusement park controversy and a missing handshake panic, he shows...... how participants and other commentators move from small-scale particularity to a generalizable pattern that is understood to. This leads to the argument that the reproduction of a specific fractal logic called “the nation in danger” and works as an exclusionary reasoning that reinforces the political...... subjectivity of Danish neonationalism. In addition, the argument opens up for a refiguring of the public–private in both psychological and political anthropology....

The deconstruction of safety arguments through adversarial counter-argument

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Armstrong, James M.; Paynter, Stephen E.

2007-01-01

The project Deconstructive Evaluation of Risk In Dependability Arguments and Safety Cases (DERIDASC) has recently experimented with techniques borrowed from literary theory as safety case analysis techniques [Armstrong. Danger: Derrida at work. Interdiscipl Sci Rev 2003;28(2):83-94. ; Armstrong J, Paynter S. Safe systems: construction, destruction, and deconstruction. In: Redmill F, Anderson T, editors. Proceedings of the 11th safety critical systems symposium, Bristol, UK. Berlin: Springer; 2003. p. 62-76. ISBN:1-85233-696-X. ]. This paper introduces our high-level framework for 'deconstructing' safety arguments. Our approach is quite general and should be applicable to different types of safety argumentation framework. As one example, we outline how the approach would work in the context of the Goal Structure Notation (GSN)

PRINCÍPIO DA LEGALIDADE PENAL COMO DIREITO HUMANO FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE OF CRIMINAL LEGALITY AS A FUNDAMENTAL HUMAN RIGHT

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

HENRIQUE HOFFMANN MONTEIRO DE CASTRO

2012-12-01

Full Text Available Resumo: O presente trabalho tem como desiderato debater o princípio da legalidade no âmbito do Direito Penal, postulado que se qualifica como direito humano fundamental. Isso porque a legalidade penal reveste-se de caráter garantidor do cidadão, possuindo caráter basilar em qualquer Estado que se pretenda Democrático de Direito, traduzindo ponto nevrálgico dos ordenamentos jurídicos que se fundem na justiça e na racionalidade. Como é indubitável que o princípio da legalidade afigura-se como garantia individual de cunho constitucional, sua análise é imprescindível para a compreensão do Direito Penal em uma visão principiológica. Para tanto, perquire-se sobre o caráter principiológico da legalidade, realiza-se reflexão sobre a íntima relação entre legalidade e Estado Democrático de Direito, perscruta-se acerca da origem histórica e do conteúdo da cláusula de legalidade, raciocina-se sobre os desdobramentos do referido postulado, são formuladas ideias sobre os mandados de criminalização, desenvolvem-se argumentos em torno de polêmicas questões que envolvem a legalidade penal e, finalmente, alguns arremates acerca do tema são realizados.Abstract: This work aims to discuss the principle of legality in criminal law, principle qualified as a fundamental human right. The criminal legality is a natural guarantee of citizens, having basic character in any state that pretends itself democratic, reflecting main feature of the legal systems based on justice and rationality. As it is clear that the principle of legality seems to be a constitutional guarantee of individual, its analysis is essential for understanding a principled view of the criminal law. To do so, it perquires about the character of legality, reflects on the intimate relationship between legality and democratic state, peers up about the historical origin and content of the clause of legality, reasons about the consequences of this postulate, formulates ideas

Rich preference-based argumentation frameworks

OpenAIRE

Amgoud , Leila; Vesic , Srdjan

2014-01-01

International audience; An argumentation framework is seen as a directed graph whose nodes are arguments and arcs are attacks between the arguments. Acceptable sets of arguments, called extensions, are computed using a semantics. Existing semantics are solely based on the attacks and do not take into account other important criteria like the intrinsic strengths of arguments. The contribution of this paper is three fold. First, we study how preferences issued from differences in strengths of a...

Argumentation and Game Theory

Science.gov (United States)

Rahwan, Iyad; Larson, Kate

In a large class of multi-agent systems, agents are self-interested in the sense that each agent is interested only in furthering its individual goals, which may or may not coincide with others’ goals. When such agents engage in argument, they would be expected to argue strategically in such a way that makes it more likely for their argumentative goals to be achieved. What we mean by arguing strategically is that instead of making arbitrary arguments, an agent would carefully choose its argumentative moves in order to further its own objectives.

Legality of Tawarruq in Islamic Finance

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Nur Yuhanis Bt Ismon

2012-01-01

Full Text Available Objective – Islamic finance has been established as an alternative to the conventional banking system which is made up component not permitted under Shariah. Tawarruq is one of the Islamic finance products which commonly used in Islamic banks. This research assesses two important areas which include the principle of Tawarruq in Fiqh perspective and the practical aspect of such principle in Islamic banks in Malaysia.Method – The method used for this research is comparative analysis.Result – This research begins to explore the different views of the proponent and opponents toward the legality of Tawarruq in Fiqh . Instead of considering the basic condition of the valid sale, the other aspect has to be pondered by the contemporary scholars to render Tawarruq is valid sale according to Shariah. The legality of Tawarruq has been debate by some scholars. Due to that, there are different resolution and rulings from Islamic countries on legality of of Tawarruq . In the practical aspect, Tawarruq has been used in Malaysia by Bursa Malaysia Suq Al Sila' as a trading platform and it uses Crude Palm Oil (CPO as the commodity in Tawarruq transaction. While, in the Middle East, it uses London Metal Exchange (LME in dealing with commodity transaction through Tawarruq principle.Conclusion – Based on the legal argument on the permissibility of Tawarruq , it can be summarized that Tawarruq is permissible but subject to certain condition. Provided that genuine Tawarruq is permissible than organized Tawarruq in Tawarruq transaction.Keywords: Tawarruq, Murabahah

Den gode argumentations anatomi

DEFF Research Database (Denmark)

Kock, Christian Erik J

2013-01-01

God argumentation har tre dimensioner: Den er faktuelt retvisende, den er relevant, og den er vægtig. Desværre slipper politikerne ofte af sted med mangelfuld argumentation fordi de forklæder den godt. Derfor får du her de vigtigste redskaber til at spotte uskikkene i politisk argumentation...

Physician-patient argumentation and communication, comparing Toulmin's model, pragma-dialectics, and American sociolinguistics.

Science.gov (United States)

Rivera, Francisco Javier Uribe; Artmann, Elizabeth

2015-12-01

This article discusses the application of theories of argumentation and communication to the field of medicine. Based on a literature review, the authors compare Toulmin's model, pragma-dialectics, and the work of Todd and Fisher, derived from American sociolinguistics. These approaches were selected because they belong to the pragmatic field of language. The main results were: pragma-dialectics characterizes medical reasoning more comprehensively, highlighting specific elements of the three disciplines of argumentation: dialectics, rhetoric, and logic; Toulmin's model helps substantiate the declaration of diagnostic and therapeutic hypotheses, and as part of an interpretive medicine, approximates the pragma-dialectical approach by including dialectical elements in the process of formulating arguments; Fisher and Todd's approach allows characterizing, from a pragmatic analysis of speech acts, the degree of symmetry/asymmetry in the doctor-patient relationship, while arguing the possibility of negotiating treatment alternatives.

Society as a crime victim of legal entities

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Tanjević Nataša

2011-01-01

Full Text Available Tortious acts of legal entities have unforeseen harmful consequences in all areas. In the greedy desire to gain profit, certain legal entities do not have any regard for the most important resources of individuals and society. Damage resulting from the commission of criminal acts is very high for the whole society, especially when it comes to crimes against the environment. In order to prevent and combat corporate crime in criminal law, an increasingly wider acceptance of criminal liability of legal entities was adopted. This paper discusses the basic characteristics of corporate crime, as well as the reasons for the introduction of the criminal responsibility of legal entities. In this regard, we analyzed the law provisions regarding the liability of legal entities for criminal offenses, and concluded that despite the criminal-political need to react with more serious sanctions to the offenses of legal entities, there are certain obstacles and problems that stand in the way of introducing this responsibility.

Abortion, metaphysics and morality: a review of Francis Beckwith's defending life: a moral and legal case against abortion choice.

Science.gov (United States)

Nobis, Nathan

2011-06-01

In Defending Life: A Moral and Legal Case Against Abortion Choice (2007) and an earlier article in this journal, "Defending Abortion Philosophically"(2006), Francis Beckwith argues that fetuses are, from conception, prima facie wrong to kill. His arguments are based on what he calls a "metaphysics of the human person" known as "The Substance View." I argue that Beckwith's metaphysics does not support his abortion ethic: Moral, not metaphysical, claims that are part of this Substance View are the foundation of the argument, and Beckwith inadequately defends these moral claims. Thus, Beckwith's arguments do not provide strong support for what he calls the "pro-life" view of abortion.

The Effect of Task Instructions on Students' Use of Repetition in Argumentative Discourse

Science.gov (United States)

Gilabert, Sandra; Garcia-Mila, Merce; Felton, Mark K.

2013-11-01

The reasoning belief of argumentum ad nauseam assumes that when someone repeats something often enough, he or she becomes more convincing. The present paper analyses the use of this strategy by seventh-grade students in an argumentation task. Sixty-five students (mean age: 12.2, SD = 0.4) from a public school in a mid-sized urban environment took part in the study. The students were asked to either argue to convince an opposing partner or argue to reach consensus with an opposing partner on three dilemmas that dealt with energy sources. Data were gathered according to a between-groups design that included one independent variable (argumentative goal: to convince vs. to reach consensus) and one dependent variable (the degree of argumentative repetitions). We predicted that in the condition to convince their partner, the students would use the repetition strategy more often in their attempts to be persuasive. Our findings show that the mean number of argumentative repetitions was significantly higher for the persuasion group for both of the most frequent argumentative structures (claim and claim data). The mean percentage of repeated claims for the persuasion condition was 86.2 vs. 69.0 for the consensus condition. For the claim data, the mean percentage for the persuasion group was 35.2 vs. 24.3 for the consensus group. Also, students in the persuasion group tended to repeat one idea many times rather than repeating many ideas a few times within the same argumentative structure. The results of our study support the hypothesis that the goal of the argumentative task mediates argumentative discourse and, more concretely, the rate of repetitions and the conceptual diversity of the statements. These differences in rates of repetition and conceptual diversity are related to the amount of learning produced by the instructional goal. We apply Mercer's idea that not all classroom argumentation tasks promote learning equally.

ADVERSITY QUOTIENT DAN PENALARAN KREATIF MATEMATIS SISWA SMA DALAM PEMBELAJARAN ARGUMENT DRIVEN INQUIRY PADA MATERI TURUNAN FUNGSI

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Wahyu Hidayat

2017-04-01

Full Text Available This study is designed in the form of experiment with the design of control group and posttest only aimed at investigating the role of learning that Argument Driven Inquiry (ADI in improving senior high school students’ creative mathematical reasoning ability. The population of this study was senior high school students’ in Cimahi City and the samples were 69 senior high school students’ set purposively and randomly to be included into the experimental class and control class. Based on the results and discussion, it is concluded that: (1 creative mathematical reasoning ability of the students who received Argument Driven Inquiry (ADI instruction is better than those who received direct instruction is reviewed based on the whole and the type of Adversity Quotient (Quitter / AQ Low, Champer / AQ Medium, and the Climber / AQ High; Learning factors and type of Adversity Quotient (AQ affect the achievement of creative mathematical reasoning skills students. In addition, there is no interaction effect between learning and AQ together in developing the creative mathematical reasoning ability of students'; (3 creative mathematical reasoning ability of students’ has not been achieved optimally on the indicators novelty.

‘This Is Real Misery’: Experiences of Women Denied Legal Abortion in Tunisia

Science.gov (United States)

Hajri, Selma; Raifman, Sarah; Gerdts, Caitlin; Baum, Sarah; Foster, Diana Greene

2015-01-01

Barriers to accessing legal abortion services in Tunisia are increasing, despite a liberal abortion law, and women are often denied wanted legal abortion services. In this paper, we seek to explore the reasons for abortion denial and whether these reasons had a legal or medical basis. We also identify barriers women faced in accessing abortion and make recommendations for improved access to quality abortion care. We recruited women immediately after they had been turned away from legal abortion services at two facilities in Tunis, Tunisia. Thirteen women consented to participate in qualitative interviews two months after they were turned away from the facility. Women were denied abortion care on the day they were recruited due to three main reasons: gestational age, health conditions, and logistical barriers. Nine women ultimately terminated their pregnancies at another facility, and four women carried to term. None of the women attempted illegal abortion services or self-induction. Further research is needed in order to assess abortion denial from the perspective of providers and medical staff. PMID:26684189

Surrogate Motherhood II: Reflections after "Baby M."

Science.gov (United States)

Schwartz, Lita Linzer

1988-01-01

Discusses the "Baby M" surrogate motherhood case which has produced heated debate in popular media, legal publications, and other professional journals. Summarizes arguments offered and reasoning behind actions of judiciary. (Author/ABL)

Beyond Construction: Five arguments for the role and value of critique in learning science

Science.gov (United States)

Henderson, J. Bryan; MacPherson, Anna; Osborne, Jonathan; Wild, Andrew

2015-07-01

This paper argues that science education has overemphasized the importance of construction at the expense of critique. In doing so, it draws on two key premises-Ford's argument that the construction of knowledge requires a dialectic between construction and critique and Mercier and Sperber's theory of argumentative reasoning that critique is essential for epistemic vigilance. Five separate cases are presented which argue that the absence of critique within school science limits the opportunities for students to engage in scientific reasoning making the learning of science less effective. These five arguments incorporate research literature surrounding the nature of science, epistemology, literacy, pedagogy, and motivation. Furthermore, we draw on data collected from cognitive think-aloud interviews to show that students can, with the appropriate prompts, engage in the important epistemic activity of critique. We conclude by examining the implications for the teaching and learning of science. In essence, we argue that the undervaluing of critique within the curriculum and pedagogy of school science results in a failure to develop the analytical faculties which are the valued hall mark of the practicing scientist; a misrepresentation of the nature of science; and, more importantly, a less effective learning experience. Critique, therefore, needs to play a central role in the teaching and learning of science.

Differential roles of polar orbital prefrontal cortex and parietal lobes in logical reasoning with neutral and negative emotional content.

Science.gov (United States)

Eimontaite, Iveta; Goel, Vinod; Raymont, Vanessa; Krueger, Frank; Schindler, Igor; Grafman, Jordan

2018-05-14

To answer the question of how brain pathology affects reasoning about negative emotional content, we administered a disjunctive logical reasoning task involving arguments with neutral content (e.g. Either there are tigers or women in NYC, but not both; There are no tigers in NYC; There are women in NYC) and emotionally laden content (e.g. Either there are pedophiles or politicians in Texas, but not both; There are politicians in Texas; There are no pedophiles in Texas) to 92 neurological patients with focal lesions to various parts of the brain. A Voxel Lesion Symptom Mapping (VLSM) analysis identified 16 patients, all with lesions to the orbital polar prefrontal cortex (BA 10 & 11), as being selectively impaired in the emotional reasoning condition. Another 17 patients, all with lesions to the parietal cortex, were identified as being impaired in the neutral content condition. The reasoning scores of these two patient groups, along with 23 matched normal controls, underwent additional analysis to explore the effect of belief bias. This analysis revealed that the differences identified above were largely driven by trials where there was an incongruency between the believability of the conclusion and the validity of the argument (i.e. valid argument /false conclusion or invalid argument /true conclusion). Patients with lesions to polar orbital prefrontal cortex underperformed in incongruent emotional content trials and over performed in incongruent neutral content trials (compared to both normal controls and patients with parietal lobe lesions). Patients with lesions to parietal lobes underperformed normal controls (at a trend level) in neutral trials where there was a congruency between the believability of the conclusion and the validity of the argument (i.e. valid argument/true conclusion or invalid argument/false conclusion). We conclude that lesions to the polar orbital prefrontal cortex (i) prevent these patients from enjoying any emotionally induced cognitive

Can't see the woods for the trees: exploring the range and connection of tobacco industry argumentation in the 2012 UK standardised packaging consultation.

Science.gov (United States)

Lie, Jessamina Lih Yan; Fooks, Gary; de Vries, Nanne K; Heijndijk, Suzanne M; Willemsen, Marc C

2017-07-25

Transnational tobacco company (TTC) submissions to the 2012 UK standardised packaging consultation are studied to examine TTC argumentation in the context of Better Regulation practices. A content analysis was conducted of Philip Morris International and British American Tobacco submissions to the 2012 UK consultation. Industry arguments concerning expected costs and (contested) benefits of the policy were categorised into themes and frames. The inter-relationship between frames through linked arguments was mapped to analyse central arguments using an argumentation network. 173 arguments were identified. Arguments fell into one of five frames: ineffectiveness, negative economic consequences, harm to public health, increased crime or legal ramifications. Arguments highlighted high costs to a wide range of groups, including government, general public and other businesses. Arguments also questioned the public health benefits of standardised packaging and highlighted the potential benefits to undeserving groups. An increase in illicit trade was the most central argument and linked to the greatest variety of arguments. In policy-making systems characterised by mandatory impact assessments and public consultations, the wide range of cost (and contested benefits) based arguments highlights the risk of TTCs overloading policy actors and causing delays in policy adoption. Illicit trade related arguments are central to providing a rationale for these arguments, which include the claim that standardised packaging will increase health risks. The strategic importance of illicit trade arguments to industry argumentation in public consultations underlines the risks of relying on industry data relating to the scale of the illicit trade. © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.

Evaluating the American Nurses Association's arguments against nurse participation in assisted suicide.

Science.gov (United States)

Vogelstein, Eric

2017-01-01

This discussion paper critically assesses the American Nurses Association's stated arguments against nurse participation in assisted suicide, as found in its current (2013) position statement. Seven distinct arguments can be gleaned from the American Nurses Association's statement, based on (1) the American Nurses Association's Code of Ethics with Interpretive Statements and its injunction against nurses acting with the sole intent to end life, (2) the risks of abuse and misuse of assisted suicide, (3) nursing's social contract or covenant with society, (4) the contention that nurses must not harm their patients, (5) the sanctity of life, (6) the traditions of nursing, and (7) the fundamental goals of nursing. Each of these arguments is evaluated, and none are found to be convincing. This is crucial because the American Nurses Association's official stance on nurse participation in assisted suicide can have significant consequences for the well-being of nurses who care for patients in jurisdictions in which assisted suicide is legally available. The American Nurses Association should therefore have a strong and convincing justification for opposing the practice, if it is to take such a position. That it fails to evince such a justification in its official statement on the matter places a burden on the American Nurses Association to more strongly justify its position, or else abandon its stance against nurse participation in assisted suicide.

Graduate Courses in Argumentation Theory.

Science.gov (United States)

Benoit, William L.; Follert, Vincent F.

1986-01-01

Reports results of a survey of graduate courses in argumentation theory. Includes data on types of courses, theorists, historical and basic concepts in argument, everyday argument, resources (books and articles), etc. (PD)

Legal considerations for urban underground space development in Malaysia

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

F. Zaini

2017-12-01

Full Text Available In 2008, the Malaysia land code, named the National Land Code 1965 (NLC 1965, was amended to add Part Five (A to deal with the disposal of underground space. In addition, the Circular of the Director General of Lands and Mines No. 1/2008 was issued to assist the application of Part Five (A of the NLC 1965. However, the legislation is still questionable and has instigated many arguments among numerous actors. Therefore, this research was undertaken to examine legal considerations for the development of underground space. The focus is on four legal considerations, namely underground space ownership, the bundle of rights, depth, and underground space utilization. Rooted in qualitative methods, interviews were conducted with respondents involved in the development of underground space in Malaysia. The obtained data were then analyzed descriptively. The findings differentiated the rights of landowners for surface land and underground space, and their liability for damages and the depth. It was indicated that the current legislation in Malaysia, namely Part Five (A of the NLC 1965 and the Circular of the Director General of Lands and Mines No. 1/2008, is adequate to facilitate the development of underground space in terms of legal considerations. However, to further facilitate the development of underground land in the future, based on the research, four enhancements are recommended for legal considerations pertaining to the development of underground space in Malaysia. Keywords: Underground space, Legal consideration, Land right, Urban development

Crows spontaneously exhibit analogical reasoning.

Science.gov (United States)

Smirnova, Anna; Zorina, Zoya; Obozova, Tanya; Wasserman, Edward

2015-01-19

Analogical reasoning is vital to advanced cognition and behavioral adaptation. Many theorists deem analogical thinking to be uniquely human and to be foundational to categorization, creative problem solving, and scientific discovery. Comparative psychologists have long been interested in the species generality of analogical reasoning, but they initially found it difficult to obtain empirical support for such thinking in nonhuman animals (for pioneering efforts, see [2, 3]). Researchers have since mustered considerable evidence and argument that relational matching-to-sample (RMTS) effectively captures the essence of analogy, in which the relevant logical arguments are presented visually. In RMTS, choice of test pair BB would be correct if the sample pair were AA, whereas choice of test pair EF would be correct if the sample pair were CD. Critically, no items in the correct test pair physically match items in the sample pair, thus demanding that only relational sameness or differentness is available to support accurate choice responding. Initial evidence suggested that only humans and apes can successfully learn RMTS with pairs of sample and test items; however, monkeys have subsequently done so. Here, we report that crows too exhibit relational matching behavior. Even more importantly, crows spontaneously display relational responding without ever having been trained on RMTS; they had only been trained on identity matching-to-sample (IMTS). Such robust and uninstructed relational matching behavior represents the most convincing evidence yet of analogical reasoning in a nonprimate species, as apes alone have spontaneously exhibited RMTS behavior after only IMTS training. Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

ECONOMIC AND LEGAL ASPECTS OF THE PLANNED DAMAGES ACTIONS FOR THE BREACHES OF EC ANTITRUST LAW

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Elena Isac

2010-09-01

Full Text Available This paper investigates the planned damages actions for breaches of EC antitrust law in order to assess their impact on consumer welfare. It first examines the current legal situation and concurs that the European Union needs to regulate damages actions for breaches of EC antitrust law so that a higher number of consumers could be compensated for their losses. This paper then discusses the main legal provisions proposed by the Commission in the Green and in the White paper on damages actions for breaches of EC antitrust law. The analysis of these proposed legal provisions is done using arguments specific to the economic analysis of law. It is demonstrated that most of these proposed legal provisions will enhance consumer welfare but that there are also proposed legal provisions which will damage consumer welfare. The paper concludes that the planned damages actions for breaches of the EC law will be an improvement compared to the current situation. However, the Commission should amend some of the proposed legal provisions in order to help consumers further.

The Problem of Evil: Theodicy and Argumentation

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Shokhin Vladimir

2016-09-01

Full Text Available The paper departs from differing of two modalities of the attitude of the theistic reason to the problem of evil, i.e. building of universally valid explanatonary models (theodicy and apologies in the particular contexts (defense. The first one contradicts to the foundations of theistic world-view inasmuch as the biblical texts persuade one that causes of evil are particular and not universal and are far sometimes to be in the scope of a finite reason. In addition, logical problems with mutual correlation of the main theodicies are demonstrated. The modality of defense seems much more epistemically justified and actual, but here by no means all persuasive resources of controversy are used. The author suggests his own answers to some atheistic challenges, in the fi rst place unmasking double standards in the corresponding argumentation unavoidable for any wishful thinking and contraposes to the idea of multitude of gratuitous evils that of infinite profusion of undeserved boons.

THE THIRD MAN ARGUMENT(PARM.132A1-B2-A ‘PURELY’ METAPHYSICAL EXERCISE?

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Marcus Nabielek

2013-11-01

Full Text Available All commentators of the ‘Parmenides’ agree that the Third Man argument, 132a-b2, raises a difficulty for Plato’s theory of forms. Many commentators, following Vlastos, hold that the argument’s infinite regress is vicious for epistemic reasons. Rickless contends that the infinite regress is vicious for exclusively metaphysical reasons. This essay intends to show that Rickless’ interpretation is inadequate, as well as to vindicate Vlastos’ interpretation.

For your first born child: an ethical defense of the exploitation argument against commercial surrogacy.

Science.gov (United States)

Osberg, Brendan

2006-01-01

In this essay I explore two arguments against commercial surrogacy, based on commodification and exploitation respectively. I adopt a consequentialist framework and argue that commodification arguments must be grounded in a resultant harm to either child or surrogate, and that a priori arguments which condemn the practice for puritanical reasons cannot form a basis for public law. Furthermore there is no overwhelming evidence of harm caused to either party involved in commercial surrogacy, and hence Canadian law (which forbids the practice) must (and can) be justified on exploitative grounds. Objections raised by Wilkinson based on an 'isolated case' approach are addressed when one takes into account the political implications of public policy. I argue that is precisely these implications that justify laws forbidding commercial surrogacy on the grounds of preventing systematic exploitation.

The great slippery-slope argument.

OpenAIRE

Burgess, J A

1993-01-01

Whenever some form of beneficent killing--for example, voluntary euthanasia--is advocated, the proposal is greeted with a flood of slippery-slope arguments warning of the dangers of a Nazi-style slide into genocide. This paper is an attempt systematically to evaluate arguments of this kind. Although there are slippery-slope arguments that are sound and convincing, typical formulations of the Nazi-invoking argument are found to be seriously deficient both in logical rigour and in the social hi...

Autobiographical Reasoning: Arguing and Narrating from a Biographical Perspective

Science.gov (United States)

Habermas, Tilmann

2011-01-01

Autobiographical reasoning is the activity of creating relations between different parts of one's past, present, and future life and one's personality and development. It embeds personal memories in a culturally, temporally, causally, and thematically coherent life story. Prototypical autobiographical arguments are presented. Culture and…

Characteristics of Effective Argumentation.

Science.gov (United States)

Frana, Adrian W.

1989-01-01

Examines how the 1988 Presidential Debates provide a resource for effective instruction in public argument. Provides several examples of effective (and ineffective) argumentative speaking taken from the debates. (MM)

Environmental Argumentation as Sociocultural Activity

Science.gov (United States)

Oliveira, Alandeom W.; Akerson, Valarie L.; Oldfield, Martha

2012-01-01

While environmental argumentation has recently received much attention from science educators, little consideration has been given to how personal identities and social relationships can either support or constrain student argumentation. This study attends to this issue by examining environmental argumentation as a sociocultural activity (how…

Legal aspects of the nuclear fuel cycle and the final storage in the Federal Republic of Germany

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Strassburg, W.

1983-01-01

The public discussion on ''the waste disposal of German nuclear power plants'', is, in contrast to former political arguments, more and more determined by legal questions, as for instance the suitability for licensing compact storage and central intermediate storage for spent fuel elements. A quick and partly already occurred clarification of these legal questions by the courts guarantees that the storage facilities, which are planned or are under construction, are available in time. The implementation of the technical-scientific management and disposal concept of nuclear waste in the Atomic Energy Act according to the fourth amendment of 1976 has, on principle, been successful, even if hereby partly open legal questions arose. The clarification of these questions is among other things provided in the framework of the legal regulations, still to be expected, by means of the legal authorization in paragraph 12, paragraph 1, No. 8 and 9 of the Atomic Energy Act, which have the aim ''to regulate the disposal and radioactive wastes comprehensively. (orig./HP) [de

Arguments that take Counterconsiderations into Account

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Jan Albert van Laar

2014-09-01

Full Text Available This paper examines arguments that take counter- considerations into account, and it does so from a dialogical point of view. According to my account, a counterconsideration is part of a critical reaction from a real or imagined opponent, and an arguer may take it into account in his argument in at least six fully responsive ways. Conductive arguments (or: pro and con arguments, balance of con-siderations arguments will be characterized as one of these types. In this manner, the paper aims to show how conducive, and related kinds of argument can be understood dialogically.

Reasons of Control and Trust:
Grounding the Public Need for Transparency in the European Union

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Vigjilenca Abazi

2015-07-01

Full Text Available Public access to documents is one the European Union’s oldest and strongest policy efforts to connect with its citizens. Yet, the revision of Regulation 1049/2001 has been stuck in the pipeline for more than seven years, becoming itself an example of the allegation that the EU is too slow and complex. The stalemate in the reform is also due to the debate evolving around similar arguments and disagreements on specific provisions losing sight of the overall goal of public access.We pick up on the undercurrent in the debate: the reasons for the necessity of transparency and their varied relevance for the concrete legal revision. We also put forward a reason which is often invoked but is seldom scientifically developed for transparency: public trust.This paper focuses on ‘control’ and ‘trust’ as two primary reasons for transparency and maps their conceptual background and implications. We treat these two approaches in a stylized and typified way, so as to better comprehend the core of the matter. We point to the differences and practical overlaps of the public access to documents regime from these perspectives. By doing so, the paper attempts to introduce more innovative thinking about the modalities of access to documents and their linkage with deeper conceptual understandings of the relation between citizens and public institutions. With this theoretical contribution we hope to provide new ground for debating proposals for reform.

Social argumentation in online synchronous communication

Science.gov (United States)

Angiono, Ivan

In education, argumentation has an increasing importance because it can be used to foster learning in various fields including philosophy, history, sciences, and mathematics. Argumentation is also at the heart of scientific inquiry. Many educational technology researchers have been interested in finding out how technologies can be employed to improve students' learning of argumentation. Therefore, many computer-based tools or argumentation systems have been developed to assist students in their acquisition of argumentation skills. While the argumentation systems incorporating online debating tools present a good resource in formal settings, there is limited research revealing what argumentative skills students are portraying in informal online settings without the presence of a moderator. This dissertation investigates the nature of argumentative practices in a massively multiplayer online game where the system successfully incorporates the authentic use of online synchronous communication tools and the patterns that emerge from the interplay between a number of contextual variables including synchronicity, interest, authenticity, and topical knowledge.

Clarity Versus Accuracy and Objectivity in Written Legal English

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Violeta Janulevičienė

2011-12-01

Full Text Available This paper is an attempt to analyse the most important grammatical and, specifically, syntactic features and to point out some prominent lexical ones, which aim at accuracy and objectivity of a written legal document, and to discuss how these features influence clarity and transparency of the legal documents. The study covers the analysis of some EU, UK, US legislative acts alongside with some extracts from contract samples. The analysis reveals that written legal English is distinguished by long compound sentences, often with inverted word order and numerous embeddings, passive constructions and nominalisations, specific use of personal pronouns and collocations of synonyms (doublets and triplets, etc. These means allow to achieve the most possible accuracy and objectivity in legal texts but make them complicated and difficult to comprehend at once. Formality, achieved by the mentioned means, makes legal English distant from everyday language and often becomes a reason for criticism. Plain English supporters encourage simplifying legal language; however, long traditions of legal English make changes slow and difficult. Therefore, comprehension and usage of legal English still requires special knowledge of its lexical and grammatical features.

Truth and victims’ rights: Towards a legal epistemology of international criminal justice

OpenAIRE

Aguilera, Edgar R.

2013-01-01

The author advances the thesis that the now well established international crime victims' right to know the truth creates an opportunity for an applied epistemology reflection regarding international criminal justice. At the heart of the project lies the author's argument that this victims' right -if taken seriously- implies both the right that the international criminal justice system's normative structures or legal frameworks and practices feature a truth-promoting profile, or in other word...

Argumentative Men: Expectations of Success.

Science.gov (United States)

Schullery, Nancy M.

1999-01-01

Considers how argumentativeness is linked with several managerial qualities, such as group leadership, better decision-making, and enhanced credibility. Surveys nearly 300 full-time employed men. Shows that men at all levels exhibit the full range of argumentativeness. Finds the mean argumentativeness of supervisors at all levels is significantly…

The great slippery-slope argument.

Science.gov (United States)

Burgess, J A

1993-09-01

Whenever some form of beneficent killing--for example, voluntary euthanasia--is advocated, the proposal is greeted with a flood of slippery-slope arguments warning of the dangers of a Nazi-style slide into genocide. This paper is an attempt systematically to evaluate arguments of this kind. Although there are slippery-slope arguments that are sound and convincing, typical formulations of the Nazi-invoking argument are found to be seriously deficient both in logical rigour and in the social history and psychology required as a scholarly underpinning. As an antidote, an attempt is made both to identify some of the likely causes of genocide and to isolate some of the more modest but legitimate fears that lie behind slippery-slope arguments of this kind.

Investigating the role of content knowledge, argumentation, and situational features to support genetics literacy

Science.gov (United States)

Shea, Nicole Anne

Science curriculum is often used as a means to train students as future scientists with less emphasis placed on preparing students to reason about issues they may encounter in their daily lives (Feinstein, Allen, & Jenkins, 2013; Roth & Barton, 2004). The general public is required to think scientifically to some degree throughout their life and often across a variety of issues. From an empirical standpoint, we do not have a robust understanding of what scientific knowledge the public finds useful for reasoning about socio-scientific issues in their everyday lives (Feinstein, 2011). We also know very little about how the situational features of an issue influences reasoning strategy (i.e., the use of knowledge to generate arguments). Rapid advances in science - particularly in genetics - increasingly challenge the public to reason about socio-scientific issues. This raises questions about the public's ability to participate knowledgeably in socio-scientific debates, and to provide informed consent for a variety of novel scientific procedures. This dissertation aims to answer the questions: How do individuals use their genetic content knowledge to reason about authentic issues they may encounter in their daily lives? Individuals' scientific knowledge is a critical aspect of scientific literacy, but what scientific literacy looks like in practice as individuals use their content knowledge to reason about issues comprised of different situational features is still unclear. The purpose of this dissertation is to explore what knowledge is actually used by individuals to generate and support arguments about a variety of socio-scientific issues, and how the features of those issues influences reasoning strategy. Three studies were conducted to answer questions reflecting this purpose. Findings from this dissertation provide important insights into what scientific literacy looks like in practice.

Using the SEE-SEP Model to Analyze Upper Secondary Students' Use of Supporting Reasons in Arguing Socioscientific Issues

Science.gov (United States)

Christenson, Nina; Chang Rundgren, Shu-Nu; Höglund, Hans-Olof

2012-06-01

To achieve the goal of scientific literacy, the skills of argumentation have been emphasized in science education during the past decades. But the extent to which students can apply scientific knowledge to their argumentation is still unclear. The purpose of this study was to analyse 80 Swedish upper secondary students' informal argumentation on four socioscientific issues (SSIs) to explore students' use of supporting reasons and to what extent students used scientific knowledge in their arguments. Eighty upper secondary students were asked to express their opinions on one SSI topic they chose through written reports. The four SSIs in this study include global warming, genetically modified organisms (GMO), nuclear power, and consumption. To analyse students' supporting reasons from a holistic view, we used the SEE-SEP model, which links the six subject areas of sociology/culture (So), environment (En), economy (Ec), science (Sc), ethics/morality (Et) and policy (Po) connecting with three aspects, knowledge, value and personal experience (KVP). The results showed that students used value to a greater extent (67%) than they did scientific knowledge (27%) for all four SSI topics. According to the SEE-SEP model, the distribution of supporting reasons generated by students differed among the SSI topics. Also, some alternative concepts were disclosed in students' arguments. The implications for research and education are discussed.

Argument z důsledku a jeho varianty (Argument from Consequences and its variants

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Martina Juříková

2016-03-01

Full Text Available The article examines the use and evaluation of the argument from consequences, its historical origins since Aristotle through Blaise Pascal, David Hume until the inclusion of this argument into the textbooks of modern logic. The article also recapitulates current evaluation of this argument by Douglas Walton and along with Walton presents its two variants and criteria for evaluating their validity.

Rational hypocrisy: a Bayesian analysis based on informal argumentation and slippery slopes.

Science.gov (United States)

Rai, Tage S; Holyoak, Keith J

2014-01-01

Moral hypocrisy is typically viewed as an ethical accusation: Someone is applying different moral standards to essentially identical cases, dishonestly claiming that one action is acceptable while otherwise equivalent actions are not. We suggest that in some instances the apparent logical inconsistency stems from different evaluations of a weak argument, rather than dishonesty per se. Extending Corner, Hahn, and Oaksford's (2006) analysis of slippery slope arguments, we develop a Bayesian framework in which accusations of hypocrisy depend on inferences of shared category membership between proposed actions and previous standards, based on prior probabilities that inform the strength of competing hypotheses. Across three experiments, we demonstrate that inferences of hypocrisy increase as perceptions of the likelihood of shared category membership between precedent cases and current cases increase, that these inferences follow established principles of category induction, and that the presence of self-serving motives increases inferences of hypocrisy independent of changes in the actions themselves. Taken together, these results demonstrate that Bayesian analyses of weak arguments may have implications for assessing moral reasoning. © 2014 Cognitive Science Society, Inc.

Sensitizing Reasons by Emulating Exemplars

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Kunimasa Sato

2015-05-01

Full Text Available The fostering of rationality has long been endorsed as an educational ideal by some philosophers; in recent years, whereas some have argued for this ideal, others have challenged it, particularly within debates relevant to the study of critical thinking. Harvey Siegel, who has spelled out the philosophical theory of educating for rationality, not only has defended his view from such challenges but also has been deepening his thoughts regarding how rationality can be fostered. This paper centers on the cultivating of sensitivity to reasons in the fostering of rationality by critically examining and extending Siegel’s arguments concerning the notion of what he calls “felt reasons.” By clarifying the notion of felt reasons, I will argue for two ideas: first, teachers, parents, and fictional characters in media such as novels and films can be seen as exemplars that manifest rationality; second, the emotion of admiring exemplars may act as a motivating force for children—including small children who are still not sensitive to reasons and thus are not moved by reasons—to be critical thinkers.

Omitted Arguments and Complexity of Predication

Science.gov (United States)

Port, Martin

2010-01-01

This work focuses on the licensing conditions and logical structure of understood-argument constructions, or complement-drop constructions, in English. There are two main types of such arguments: Indefinite Understood Arguments (IUA) and Definite Understood Arguments (DUA). IUA readings occur in such cases in "He ate, He cooked". In such cases,…

Conflicting modes of reasoning in the Assisted Migration debate: a concept mapping analysis

Science.gov (United States)

Klenk, N. L.; Larson, B.

2011-12-01

A growing body of literature in biodiversity conservation and forestry has developed around the risks and benefits of the Assisted Migration (AM) of species, including recommendations for planning and management. However, despite years of academic debate, general consensus has yet to be reached between the proponents and the opponents of AM as a policy option. We hypothesize that the continued impasse arises out of fundamentally conflicting value judgments. Using a concept mapping technique, we analyzed reasons for and against AM, including the use of scientific evidence and the nature of the values and ethical norms that shape the modes of reasoning in the debate. Our results indicate the presence of a diversity of ethical arguments in addition to the standard precautionary argument and pragmatic reasoning. We further discovered that different kinds of scientific arguments are used by proponents versus opponents of AM: the former rely mostly on detailed biological and ecological facts about species most-at-risk under climate change, while the latter focus on broader ecological theories. Our analysis suggests little dispute over the scientific foundations of the debate. Instead, we suggest that the main barrier to consensus is the advocacy of fundamental values, which are a matter of personal choice, and thus not likely to be changed. One way out of this impasse is a pragmatic mode of reasoning, which eschews the debate on fundamental values and evaluates the means and ends of AM in a case-by-case approach.

Argumentation in Miranda v. Arizona.

Science.gov (United States)

Benoit, William L.

1991-01-01

Investigates the argumentation advanced in briefs, oral arguments, and the Supreme Court's opinion in the case of Miranda versus Arizona. Considers the background of the case, analyzes the argumentation and its influences on the court, and stresses the importance of viewing the Supreme Court as an active participant in the decision-making process.…

Relating Reasoning Methodologies in Linear Logic and Process Algebra

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Yuxin Deng

2012-11-01

Full Text Available We show that the proof-theoretic notion of logical preorder coincides with the process-theoretic notion of contextual preorder for a CCS-like calculus obtained from the formula-as-process interpretation of a fragment of linear logic. The argument makes use of other standard notions in process algebra, namely a labeled transition system and a coinductively defined simulation relation. This result establishes a connection between an approach to reason about process specifications and a method to reason about logic specifications.

Arguments from Developmental Order.

Science.gov (United States)

Stöckle-Schobel, Richard

2016-01-01

In this article, I investigate a special type of argument regarding the role of development in theorizing about psychological processes and cognitive capacities. Among the issues that developmental psychologists study, discovering the ontogenetic trajectory of mechanisms or capacities underpinning our cognitive functions ranks highly. The order in which functions are developed or capacities are acquired is a matter of debate between competing psychological theories, and also philosophical conceptions of the mind - getting the role and the significance of the different steps in this order right could be seen as an important virtue of such theories. Thus, a special kind of strategy in arguments between competing philosophical or psychological theories is using developmental order in arguing for or against a given psychological claim. In this article, I will introduce an analysis of arguments from developmental order, which come in two general types: arguments emphasizing the importance of the early cognitive processes and arguments emphasizing the late cognitive processes. I will discuss their role in one of the central tools for evaluating scientific theories, namely in making inferences to the best explanation. I will argue that appeal to developmental order is, by itself, an insufficient criterion for theory choice and has to be part of an argument based on other core explanatory or empirical virtues. I will end by proposing a more concerted study of philosophical issues concerning (cognitive) development, and I will present some topics that also pertain to a full-fledged 'philosophy of development.'

ERISTIC ARGUMENTATION IN ADVERTISING

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Skirmantė Biržietienė

2014-10-01

Full Text Available Advertising may be examined as a particular form of rhetoric the aims of which are the same as of rhetoric, namely to affect mind, will, feelings, and to persuade. The theory of rhetoric, the main object of which is discourse not only in narrow meaning (as verbal expression of ideas (i.e. to say text, but also in broad meaning – as a communicative act between the addresser and the addressee since its interdisciplinary nature provides the right tools to explore the advertising discourse. The theory of rhetoric is successfully applied in development of advertising discourse, because it helps to foresee the communicative act between the addresser and the addressee. Advertising and rhetoric are combined by many common elements, but the same goal is the most important: both, rhetoric and advertising seek for persuasion through verbal and non-verbal measures. The paper deals with the analysis of the inventive level of advertising discourse, i.e., eristic arguments, spread of ways of proofing / persuasion. Eristic argumentation is a dominant argumentation type in advertising. This method of persuasion is a way to create truth visibility although it is just superficial. The most typical schemes of eristic argumentation used in advertising are as follows: argumentum ad vanitatem (appeal to the vanity of the addressee, argumentum ad verecundiam (appeal to the authority, argumentum baculinum (method of “whip” argument, argumentum ad novitatem (appeal to novelty. The article shows the usage of eristic arguments in Lithuanian commercial ads.

The South African Constitutional Court Experience: Reasoning Patterns Based on Foreign Law

OpenAIRE

Andrea Lollini

2012-01-01

This article aims to analyse the phenomenon of the diffusion of interpretive paradigms or argumentation models between constitutional courts. This phenomenon involves the importation of parameters - defined here as extra-systemic to a specific legal system - and the use of the comparative method in applying constitutional texts.The main subject of this study is the analysis of the first 11 years of South African constitutional jurisprudence, which is a convenient scenario since a constitution...

Enhancing and Evaluating Scientific Argumentation in the Inquiryoriented College Chemistry Classroom

Science.gov (United States)

D'Souza, Annabel Nica

The research presented in chapters 2, 3, and 4 in this dissertation uses a sociocultural and sociohistorical lens, particularly around power, authority of knowledge and identity formation, to investigate the complexity of engaging in, supporting, and evaluating high-quality argumentation within a college biochemistry inquiry-oriented classroom. Argumentation skills are essential to college and career (National Research Council, 2010) and for a democratic citizenry. It is central to science teaching and learning (Osborne et al., 2004a) and can deepen content knowledge (Jimenez-Aleixandre et al., 2000; Jimenez-Aleixandre & Pereiro-Munhoz, 2002). When students have opportunities to make claims and support it with evidence and reasoning they may also increase their problem-solving and critical thinking capacity (Case, 2005; Willingham, 2007). Overall, this has implications in supporting students to become increasingly literate in scientific ideas, language, and practices. However, supporting argumentation can be challenging for instructors, particularly in designing leaning environments that facilitate and evaluate both the process and the product during student discussions (Duschl & Osborne, 2002). Fostering argumentation is complex and requires explicit modeling and multiple opportunities for dialogic interactions. This dissertation will examine how several facets influence argumentation in order to support instructors in implementing and improving argumentation in their inquiry-oriented classrooms. These facets include access to language and use of discursive moves, classroom design, curriculum and instructional activities, and interactional dynamics and power negotiation. The data set for this dissertation is a transcript generated from the audio- and video capture of a 7-minute student discussion around a mechanism in the TCA (TriCarboxylic Acid) cycle, as well as student writing, and course documents from student portfolios. This dissertation, organized using the

The Bald And Golden Eagle Protection Act, Species-Based Legal Protection And The Danger Of Misidentification

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Johann C Knobel

2015-12-01

Full Text Available The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act of 1940 bestows legal protection on two North American eagle species in the United States of America. The Act was originally aimed at the legal protection of only one species: the Bald Eagle Haliaeetus leucocephalus, the national symbol of the USA. Later the Act was amended to extend protection also to the Golden Eagle Aquila chrysaetos. The Bald Eagle was an Endangered Species, but the Golden Eagle was not formally listed as Endangered nationwide in the USA. One of the reasons for extending legal protection to the Golden Eagle under the Act was to strengthen the legal protection of the Bald Eagle, because immature Bald Eagles were being misidentified as Golden Eagles and shot. Additional factors relating to Golden Eagle mortality also made legal protection of the Golden Eagle desirable. The danger that a rare and legally protected species can be misidentified and mistaken for a more common and unprotected species can therefore serve as a reason for bestowing legal protection on the more common species as well. Other factors may also indicate that legal protection of the more common species is desirable, making the case more compelling. If this line of reasoning is applied in respect of South African birds of prey, a strong case can be made in favour of extending legal protection under the national biodiversity legislation to more species than the small number of species currently enjoying such protection. Species that are listed as Vulnerable under South African national biodiversity legislation may be misidentified as species that are not subject to such protection. Additional factors are also present that make such an extension of legal protection desirable.

Ethical issues in medico-legal exposures

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

O'Reilly, G.; Malone, J. F.

2008-01-01

The Medical Exposure Directive (MED) 97/43/Euratom defines medico-legal procedures as 'procedures performed for insurance or legal purposes without a medical indication'. The term 'medico-legal exposures' covers a wide range of possible types of exposures, very different in nature, for which the only feature in common is the fact that the main reason for performing them does not relate directly to the health of the individual being exposed to ionising radiation. The key issue in medico-legal exposures is justification. Balancing the advantages and disadvantages of such exposures is complex because not only can these be difficult to quantify and hence compare, but often the advantage may be to society whereas the disadvantage is usually to an individual. This adds an additional layer of ethical complexity to the problem and one, which requires input from a number of sources beyond the established radiation protection community. Because medico-legal exposures are considered to be medical exposures, they are not subject to dose limits. In medico-legal exposures where the benefit is not necessarily to the individual undergoing the exposure, the question must be asked as to whether or not this is an appropriate framework within which to conduct such exposures. This paper looks at the current situation in Europe, highlighting some of the particular problems that have arisen, and tries to identify the areas, which require further clarification and guidance. (authors)

The Social Nature of Argumentative Practices: The Philosophy of Argument and Audience Reception

OpenAIRE

Paula Olmos

2018-01-01

Abstract: This article reviews Christopher W. Tindale’s The Philosophy of Argument and Audience Reception (Cambridge, 2015). Résumé: Cet article est une critique de The Philosophy of Argument and Audience Reception (Cambridge, 2015) de Christopher W. Tindale.

[Use of contraception and reasons for choosing abortion among abortion applicants].

Science.gov (United States)

Hansen, S K; Birkebaek, J S; Husfeldt, C; Munck, C B; Nøddebo, S M; Petersson, B H

1996-10-07

The object of this study was to describe a group of women applying for legal abortion in relation to their use of contraception and reasons for choosing an abortion. During a period of 13 months (1991-92) a questionnaire was distributed to women applying for legal abortion at Hillerød Hospital in Denmark. Three hundred and thirty-nine women participated. Fifty-nine percent of the women had become pregnant although they had used contraception. As seen in other studies, women still state demographic factors as their most important reasons for choosing an abortion. Women with two or more children do not want to have more children. Single women do not want children without being in a stable relationship. Furthermore occupation and education were frequently stated as important reasons for having an abortion. Economy and housing were not main reasons but contributory factors. Thirty percent of the women expressed ambivalence about the choice of abortion at the time when the abort was due.

Social values and the corruption argument against financial incentives for healthy behaviour.

Science.gov (United States)

Brown, Rebecca C H

2017-03-01

Financial incentives may provide a way of reducing the burden of chronic diseases by motivating people to adopt healthy behaviours. While it is still uncertain how effective such incentives could be for promoting health, some argue that, even if effective, there are ethical objections that preclude their use. One such argument is made by Michael Sandel, who suggests that monetary transactions can have a corrupting effect on the norms and values that ordinarily regulate exchange and behaviour in previously non-monetised contexts. In this paper, I outline Sandel's corruption argument and consider its validity in the context of health incentives. I distinguish between two forms of corruption that are implied by Sandel's argument: efficiency corruption and value corruption While Sandel's thought-provoking discussion provides a valuable contribution to debates about health policies generally and health incentives specifically, I suggest the force of his criticism of health incentives is limited: further empirical evidence and theoretical reasoning are required to support the suggestion that health incentives are an inappropriate tool for promoting health. While I do not find Sandel's corruption argument compelling, this only constitutes a partial defence of health incentives, since other criticisms relating to their use may prove more successful. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/.

Arguments from Developmental Order

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Richard eStöckle-Schobel

2016-05-01

Full Text Available In this article, I investigate a special type of argument regarding the role of development in theorising about psychological processes and cognitive capacities. Among the issues that developmental psychologists study, discovering the ontogenetic trajectory of mechanisms or capacities underpinning our cognitive functions ranks highly. The order in which functions are developed or capacities are acquired is a matter of debate between competing psychological theories, and also philosophical conceptions of the mind – getting the role and the significance of the different steps in this order right could be seen as an important virtue of such theories.Thus, a special kind of strategy in arguments between competing philosophical or psychological theories is using developmental order in arguing for or against a given psychological claim. In this article, I will introduce an analysis of arguments from developmental order, which come in two general types: arguments emphasising the importance of the early cognitive processes and arguments emphasising the late cognitive processes. I will discuss their role in one of the central tools for evaluating scientific theories, namely in making inferences to the best explanation. I will argue that appeal to developmental order is, by itself, an insufficient criterion for theory choice and has to be part of an argument based on other core explanatory or empirical virtues. I will end by proposing a more concerted study of philosophical issues concerning (cognitive development, and I will present some topics that also pertain to a full-fledged ‘philosophy of development’.

Autobiographical reasoning: arguing and narrating from a biographical perspective.

Science.gov (United States)

Habermas, Tilmann

2011-01-01

Autobiographical reasoning is the activity of creating relations between different parts of one's past, present, and future life and one's personality and development. It embeds personal memories in a culturally, temporally, causally, and thematically coherent life story. Prototypical autobiographical arguments are presented. Culture and socializing interactions shape the development of autobiographical reasoning especially in late childhood and adolescence. Situated at the intersection of cognitive and narrative development and autobiographical memory, autobiographical reasoning contributes to the development of personality and identity, is instrumental in efforts to cope with life events, and helps to create a shared history. Copyright © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc., A Wiley Company.

When doubting begins: exploring inductive reasoning in obsessive-compulsive disorder.

Science.gov (United States)

Pélissier, Marie-Claude; O'Connor, Kieron P; Dupuis, Gilles

2009-03-01

The objective of this study was to test the hypothesis that inductive reasoning plays a role in obsessional doubting by comparing an OCD sample with a non-OCD control group in performance of an inductive reasoning task. The 'Reasoning with Inductive Arguments Task' (RIAT) measures inductive performance using arguments drawn from both given vs. self-generated sources and containing neutral vs. OCD-related content. Both an OCD group recruited from clinical referrals and a control group recruited from the general population were compared on performance of the RIAT. People with OCD tended to doubt an initial conclusion much more than controls in the light of subsequent alternative conclusions given by the experimenter. There were no significant differences between the two groups in the self-generated condition. The OCD group doubted more regardless of whether the items were OCD-relevant or neutral. The control group also doubted the initial conclusions but not to the same extent as the OCD group in the 'given' condition and their degree of doubting did not differ between self-generated or given items. People with OCD may create doubt because they are giving too much credit to mental models given from external sources.

The legal responsibilities of the health-care librarian.

Science.gov (United States)

Muir, A; Oppenheim, C

1995-06-01

This article discusses the legal responsibilities that information intermediaries have towards the users of their services. The areas of law that affect legal liability are contract law, tort and strict liability. The likelihood of health-care librarians being held liable for the service they provide is assessed, and methods of reducing this risk are discussed. The key issues are: whether the recipient is relying on the information you provide and whether this reliance is reasonable; whether money changed hands; and whether the institution is under a statutory obligation to provide the information. All-embracing exclusion clauses are often used as an attempt to exclude liability, but their validity in law is doubtful, and they should be replaced by more reasonable ones. Adhering to good professional practice, and avoiding interpreting information for laymen are ways of minimizing liability. If court proceedings do take place, professional indemnity insurance can reduce financial loss.

Zero expression of arguments in Old Danish

DEFF Research Database (Denmark)

Heltoft, Lars

2014-01-01

arguments in Scanic are semantically different from pronouns, and therefore pronouns and zero arguments are not variants. At one level, zero arguments and pronouns are similar with respect to function, namely to supply means for establishing co-reference in text; however, they are not semantically...... equivalent. By reducing these two categories to one single underlying category, such as pro, one would miss this point. On the contrary, zero arguments are arguably full-bodied signs with their own content, thus corresponding to Melčuk’s Zero Sign Introduction Principle.......Old Scandinavian (represented here by Old Danish) allowed zero arguments (null-arguments) in any nominal (argument) position, that is: for NPs as subjects, objects and in PPs. In generative grammar, zero arguments are held to be variants of pronouns, but in this article, I shall claim that zero...

Practical Reason in Practice: Reflections on a Business Ethics Course.

Science.gov (United States)

Warren, Richard C.

1995-01-01

A business ethics course aiming to depict business as a system of relationships and responsibilities covers the following areas: consideration of the moral climate of society, character development, exercise of moral imagination, and moral reasoning. The course introduces ethical theory and argument in a business context. (SK)

Nominalized clauses, clausal arguments and agreement

OpenAIRE

Picallo, M. Carme

2001-01-01

Strict minimalist assumptions require adopting the hypothesis that argument clauses and nominalized clauses are assigned Phi features. The data examined suggest that the interpretable Phi content of these arguments is specified as [-P, -N, -G]. We conclude that all arguments (of the clausal or of the nominal types) are subject to the operation Agree with a functional category. All arguments behave alike as far as abstract computational operations is concerned. The computational component is b...

The Binomial Coefficient for Negative Arguments

OpenAIRE

Kronenburg, M. J.

2011-01-01

The definition of the binomial coefficient in terms of gamma functions also allows non-integer arguments. For nonnegative integer arguments the gamma functions reduce to factorials, leading to the well-known Pascal triangle. Using a symmetry formula for the gamma function, this definition is extended to negative integer arguments, making the symmetry identity for binomial coefficients valid for all integer arguments. The agreement of this definition with some other identities and with the bin...

Theoretical Issues of Legal Regulation of Municipal Solid Waste Handling

OpenAIRE

Altynbekkyzy Alua; Bekezhanov Dauren Nurzhanovich

2017-01-01

The relevance of comparative analysis of legal regulation of environmental protection is due to several reasons. Firstly, it expands the boundaries of interpretation of legal norms and acts of environmental law. Secondly, it allows relying on experience in the latest achievements of legislative activity in developed countries. Thirdly, taking into consideration the legislative mistakes of other countries, it helps to avoid similar mistakes in the process of improving Kazakh legislation. And f...

A Kantian argument against comparatively advantageous genetic modification.

Science.gov (United States)

Jensen, David

2011-08-01

The genetic modification of children is becoming a more likely possibility given our rapid progress in medical technologies. I argue, from a broadly Kantian point of view, that at least one kind of such modification-modification by a parent for the sake of a child's comparative advantage-is not rationally justified. To argue this, I first characterize a necessary condition on reasons and rational justification: what is a reason for an agent to do an action in one set of circumstances must be a reason for any in those circumstances to do the action. I then show that comparatively advantageous genetic modification violates this principle since a child's "getting ahead" through genetic modification cannot be rationally justified unless other children also could receive the modification, thus rendering the advantage useless. Finally, I consider the major objection to this it seems to disallow all cases of a parent's helping a child get ahead, something that parents normally engage in with their children. I argue that typical practices of developing a comparative advantage in a child, as well as practices of societal competition in general, do not conflict because they involve circumstances that mitigate the universal character of reasons. Many ordinary cases of competitive advantage that we think of as unjust, in fact, can be explained by my argument.

Rethinking the Argumentative Essay

Science.gov (United States)

Schneer, David

2014-01-01

This article investigates the construction of the argumentative essay as it is commonly presented in academic writing textbooks and classrooms for English language learners. The author first examines the traditional three-stage structure (thesis-argument-conclusion) and then problematizes it within a genre-based approach to academic writing. He…

The Ethics of Human Life Extension: The Second Argument from Evolution.

Science.gov (United States)

Gyngell, Chris

2015-12-01

One argument that is sometimes made against pursuing radical forms of human life extension is that such interventions will make the species less evolvable, which would be morally undesirable. In this article, I discuss the empirical and evaluative claims of this argument. I argue that radical increases in life expectancy could, in principle, reduce the evolutionary potential of human populations through both biological and cultural mechanisms. I further argue that if life extension did reduce the evolvability of the species, this will be undesirable for three reasons: (1) it may increase the species' susceptibility to extinction risks, (2) it may adversely affect institutions and practices that promote well-being, and (3) it may impede moral progress. © The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press, on behalf of the Journal of Medicine and Philosophy Inc. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Ethical, legal and social issues to consider when designing a surrogacy law.

Science.gov (United States)

Ekberg, Merryn Elizabeth

2014-03-01

The aim of this article is to address the ethical, legal and social issues that arise when a woman becomes pregnant and gives birth to a child with the intention of surrendering this child to another woman or couple. The secondary aim is to offer some recommendations that will be beneficial for the lawmakers, policymakers and regulators who design and enforce the rules and regulations that govern surrogacy arrangements. The article considers both commercial and altruistic surrogacy and highlights some of the similarities and differences between the two. Beginning with the initial question of whether surrogacy should be legal, the controversial questions raised relate to the time before conception, during the pregnancy and after the birth of the child. The article concludes that surrogacy arrangements are ethical and should be legal because they enable the medically and socially infertile, including singles and same-sex couples, the opportunity to become parents and to enjoy the lifelong pleasures of parenthood. For many, this will be the strongest argument for the legalisation of surrogacy and the greatest benefit to arise from surrogacy arrangements.

One good reason to speak of ‘climate refugees’

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

François Gemenne

2015-05-01

Full Text Available The concept of ‘environmental refugees’, or ‘climate refugees’, has been progressively abandoned, as having no legal basis. I want to argue that there are good reasons to use the term.

Non-Discriminating Arguments and Their Uses

DEFF Research Database (Denmark)

Christiansen, Henning; Gallagher, John Patrick

2009-01-01

We present a technique for identifying predicate arguments that play no role in determining the control flow of a logic program with respect to goals satisfying given mode and sharing restrictions.  We call such arguments non-discriminating arguments. We show that such arguments can be detected...... by an automatic analysis. Following this, we define a transformation procedure, called discriminator slicing, that removes the non-discriminating arguments, resulting in a program whose computation trees are isomorphic to those of the original program.  Finally, we show how the results of the original program can...... be reconstructed from trace of the transformed program with the original arguments.   Thus the overall result is a two-stage execution of a program, which can be applied usefully in several contexts;  we describe a case study in optimising computations in the probabilistic logic program language PRISM, and discuss...

Engaging students in learning science through promoting creative reasoning

Science.gov (United States)

Waldrip, Bruce; Prain, Vaughan

2017-10-01

Student engagement in learning science is both a desirable goal and a long-standing teacher challenge. Moving beyond engagement understood as transient topic interest, we argue that cognitive engagement entails sustained interaction in the processes of how knowledge claims are generated, judged, and shared in this subject. In this paper, we particularly focus on the initial claim-building aspect of this reasoning as a crucial phase in student engagement. In reviewing the literature on student reasoning and argumentation, we note that the well-established frameworks for claim-judging are not matched by accounts of creative reasoning in claim-building. We develop an exploratory framework to characterise and enact this reasoning to enhance engagement. We then apply this framework to interpret two lessons by two science teachers where they aimed to develop students' reasoning capabilities to support learning.

The argument from moral psychology

OpenAIRE

Milevski, Voin

2015-01-01

The argument from moral psychology is one of the strongest arguments that non-cognitivists use against cognitivism-the metaethical position according to which our moral judgements express beliefs. According to this argument, once we put together the Humean theory of motivation and motivational internalism, we yield the conclusion that cognitivism cannot represent the correct view about the semantic function of moral discourse. I will first attempt to show that a neurological syndrome, called ...

A Framework for a Clinical Reasoning Knowledge Warehouse

DEFF Research Database (Denmark)

Vilstrup Pedersen, Klaus; Boye, Niels

2004-01-01

is stored and made accessible when relevant to the reasoning context and the specific patient case. Furthermore, the information structure supports the creation of new generalized knowledge using data mining tools. The patient case is divided into an observation level and an opinion level. At the opinion......, Knowledge Management Systems and Business Intelligence to make context based, patient case specific analysis and knowledge management. The knowledge base integrates three sources of information that supports clinical reasoning: general information, guidelines and health records. New generalized knowledge...... level, reasoning participants can express their argument based opinions about a patient case, thereby enhancing the knowledge about the state of and plans for the patient. An opinion language that supports expressing a possible imprecise/uncertain opinion based on imprecise...

Taking It to the Next Level: Students Using Inductive Reasoning

Science.gov (United States)

Murawska, Jaclyn M.; Zollman, Alan

2015-01-01

Although discussions about inductive reasoning can be traced back thousands of years (Fitelson 2011), the implementation of the Standards for Mathematical Practice (SMP) within the Common Core State Standards (CCSSI 2010) is generating renewed attention to how students learn mathematics. The third SMP, "Construct viable arguments and critique…

Social values as arguments: similar is convincing

Science.gov (United States)

Maio, Gregory R.; Hahn, Ulrike; Frost, John-Mark; Kuppens, Toon; Rehman, Nadia; Kamble, Shanmukh

2014-01-01

Politicians, philosophers, and rhetors engage in co-value argumentation: appealing to one value in order to support another value (e.g., “equality leads to freedom”). Across four experiments in the United Kingdom and India, we found that the psychological relatedness of values affects the persuasiveness of the arguments that bind them. Experiment 1 found that participants were more persuaded by arguments citing values that fulfilled similar motives than by arguments citing opposing values. Experiments 2 and 3 replicated this result using a wider variety of values, while finding that the effect is stronger among people higher in need for cognition and that the effect is mediated by the greater plausibility of co-value arguments that link motivationally compatible values. Experiment 4 extended the effect to real-world arguments taken from political propaganda and replicated the mediating effect of argument plausibility. The findings highlight the importance of value relatedness in argument persuasiveness. PMID:25147529

Social Values as Arguments: Similar is Convincing

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Gregory R Maio

2014-08-01

Full Text Available Politicians, philosophers, and rhetors engage in co-value argumentation: appealing to one value in order to support another value (e.g., equality leads to freedom. Across four experiments in the United Kingdom and India, we found that the psychological relatedness of values affects the persuasiveness of the arguments that bind them. Experiment 1 found that participants were more persuaded by arguments citing values that fulfilled similar motives than by arguments citing opposing values. Experiments 2 and 3 replicated this result using a wider variety of values, while finding that the effect is stronger among people higher in need for cognition and that the effect is mediated by the greater plausibility of co-value arguments that link motivationally compatible values. Experiment 4 extended the effect to real-world arguments taken from political propaganda and replicated the mediating effect of argument plausibility. The findings highlight the importance of value relatedness in argument persuasiveness.

Legalization of Same-Sex Partnerships and the Possibility of "the Politics of Recongnition" : Learning from a Debate in the United States

OpenAIRE

佐藤, 美和

2008-01-01

In this paper, I show importance of interpreting legalization of same-sex partnerships as a process of "the politics of recognition" for gay and lesbian, through featuring on the argument about legalization of partnerships in U.S.A. In the first section, I survey evolution of lawsuits to demand the right to marry for same-sex couples, from that in 70's to Goodridge decision of the Massachusetts Supreme Court in 2003. From Beahr decision of the Hawaii Supreme Court in 1993 to Goodridge decisio...

The Role of Persuasive Arguments in Changing Affirmative Action Attitudes and Expressed Behavior in Higher Education

Science.gov (United States)

White, Fiona A.; Charles, Margaret A.; Nelson, Jacqueline K.

2008-01-01

The research reported in this article examined the conditions under which persuasive arguments are most effective in changing university students' attitudes and expressed behavior with respect to affirmative action (AA). The conceptual framework was a model that integrated the theory of reasoned action and the elaboration likelihood model of…

Irrelevance Reasoning in Knowledge Based Systems

Science.gov (United States)

Levy, A. Y.

1993-01-01

This dissertation considers the problem of reasoning about irrelevance of knowledge in a principled and efficient manner. Specifically, it is concerned with two key problems: (1) developing algorithms for automatically deciding what parts of a knowledge base are irrelevant to a query and (2) the utility of relevance reasoning. The dissertation describes a novel tool, the query-tree, for reasoning about irrelevance. Based on the query-tree, we develop several algorithms for deciding what formulas are irrelevant to a query. Our general framework sheds new light on the problem of detecting independence of queries from updates. We present new results that significantly extend previous work in this area. The framework also provides a setting in which to investigate the connection between the notion of irrelevance and the creation of abstractions. We propose a new approach to research on reasoning with abstractions, in which we investigate the properties of an abstraction by considering the irrelevance claims on which it is based. We demonstrate the potential of the approach for the cases of abstraction of predicates and projection of predicate arguments. Finally, we describe an application of relevance reasoning to the domain of modeling physical devices.

e-Learning strategies in occupational legal medicine based on problem solving through "CASUS" system.

Science.gov (United States)

Martínez-Jarreta, B; Monsó, E; Gascón, S; Casalod, Y; Abecia, E; Kolb, S; Reichert, J; Radon, K

2009-04-01

The use of online teaching tools facilitate the incorporation of self-learning methods. With a view to encouraging convergence in teaching tools and methods in Occupational Legal Medicine, an initiative was set up within the classes of Legal and Forensic Medicine at Saragossa University, as part of the EU funded NetWoRM project, which has been led since 1999 by Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität in Munich (Germany). The interest of medical students in Occupational Legal Medicine has so far been low and in addition different aspects complicate the teaching of Occupational Legal Medicine at medical schools: One reason for the low interest is the limited availability of bedside teaching, one of the students' most favourite and effective way to learn. The reason for that is that most medical schools with occupational departments only have outpatient clinics. "Interesting" patients who be need for educational purposes are therefore only available for a limited part of the day. However, in order to recognize and prevent occupational disorders each medical student and physician needs profound clinical knowledge in Occupational Legal Medicine. This project has proven to be highly efficient in permitting the creation and validation of teaching tools which cover and improve the traditional training of the Occupational Legal Medicine programme imparted in the degree of Medicine.

Competitive Legal Professionals’ use of Technology in Legal Practice and Legal Research

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

T du Plessis

2008-12-01

Full Text Available Advances in the information and communication technologies have led to the availability of a range of primary and secondary legal research publications online via the Internet, rather than on other storing devices such as compact discs or publications in the print media. Not only has information and communication technology (ICT impacted on the availability of legal information resources, but its effects are also noticed in various law-related areas such as legal practice management, legal education, corporate governance and the law per se. The question addressed by this article is whether the application of ICTs has an effect on the practice of law, and specifically whether information and knowledge management affects the processes of legal research in modern legal practice. Various issues are considered in this regard, including what the concept of knowledge management (KM entails in a law firm and what the current KM trends in South African law firms are. The article investigates global trends in the application of ICTs for legal research purposes, what the specific applications of KM in support of legal research may be, how information technology applications and KM systems and strategies can support the legal research process, and what the benefits of KM are to legal research. It finally discusses the impact technology has had on the skills required of competitive legal professionals.

Logical Normativity and Common Sense Reasoning

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Evandro Agazzi

2011-04-01

Full Text Available Logic, considered as a technical discipline inaugurated by Aristotle and typically represented by the variety of the modern logical calculi, constitutes a clarification and refinement of a conviction and practice present in common sense, that is, the fact that humans believe that truth can be acquired not only by immediate evidence, but also by means of arguments. As a first step logic can be seen as a “descriptive” record of the main forms of the arguments present in common sense, but the fact that some of these patterns can actually allow for the derivation of false consequences from true premises imposes the task of making explicit what patterns correspond to a “correct reasoning” and what not. At this point logic (that contains the presentation of such patterns appears endowed with a “normative” characteristic. This amounts to saying that logical calculi are intended to adequately mirror the intuitive notion of “logical consequence” and in this sense they cannot be totally arbitrary or conventional, but must satisfy certain basic requirements such as the conditions of soundness and (as far as possible of semantic completeness. In such a way they are “judged” according to the fundamental requirements present at the level of common sense and appear as “idealizations” of the kinds of reasoning practiced in common sense. For this reason also several kinds of logical calculi are fully justified since they make explicit in an idealized form the concrete ways of reasoning that are imposed by the particular domain of reference of the discipline in which they are used and which are basically recognized in common sense.

THE PROBLEM OF THE VALUES SUPPORTING REASONING IN THE HUMANITIES: A COGNITIVE-PRAGMATIC APPROACH

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Tatiana Savtchouk

2017-04-01

Full Text Available The main cognitive models of the values supporting reasoning in the discourse of the humanities are identified, the typology of selected schemes is made, their modifications are characterised, the pragmatic differences of the models are determined. Particular attention is paid to the “cause to aim” justification of the value judgments that prevails in the humanities. The regularities of verbal representation of cognitive structures are ascertained, pragmatic properties of argumentative markers are explicated. The author’s typology of tactics that implements rational and emotional value-study strategies is proposed. A number of fallacies in the justification of normative value judgments are revealed, such as “semantic-pragmatic dissonance”, “simulation of reasoning”, “pseudoauthority”, “superfluity of argumentative resource”. The sources of such shortcomings are exemplified by the facts from the evidence base. The conclusion is that the author of the article chooses the cognitive model of argumentation in support of the values, the ways of its verbal presentation and the tactics of reasoning on the basis of pragmatic factors.

Analogies in Medicine: Valuable for Learning, Reasoning, Remembering and Naming

Science.gov (United States)

Pena, Gil Patrus; Andrade-Filho, Jose de Souza

2010-01-01

Analogies are important tools in human reasoning and learning, for resolving problems and providing arguments, and are extensively used in medicine. Analogy and similarity involve a structural alignment or mapping between domains. This cognitive mechanism can be used to make inferences and learn new abstractions. Through analogies, we try to…

RAPE CASES: GENRE AND RHETORICAL ANALYSIS OF CONTROVERSIAL MALAYSIAN LEGAL JUDGEMENTS

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Maya Khemlani David

2016-12-01

Full Text Available Kachru and Smith (2008 emphasize that effectual communication in the context in which different varieties of world English are used, entails awareness of the varieties in use and their cultural, social, and ideational functions. Court reports by Malaysian Judges are part of legal documents, which may be considered as a genre. Investigating the linguistic details of these reports may be helpful in understanding the argumentative and persuasive strategies used in these judgments. The issue of rape and justice is an important concern in society. The aim of this study is to investigate Malaysian judgment reports in the English language on rape cases from a linguistic perspective. Specifically, the aim of the study is to identify court of appeal judgment reports of rape cases as a Genre and to identify the moves used in this genre. The moves within the genre were identified by studying two controversial reports which showed that the judgments might suffer from relying on pathos argumentation in one critical move.

Space and the complexity of European rules and policies: The common projects Galileo and GMES—precedence for a new European legal approach?

Science.gov (United States)

Froehlich, Annette

2010-04-01

The two European flagship space projects, Galileo and GMES, clearly show that the current existing legal rules of the two organisations involved (European Union and European Space Agency) are not compatible. Moreover, it is quite impossible to implement a common project if every single organisation insists on the application of its own rules strictu sensu. Nevertheless, due to the political desire to advance these projects rapidly and to make them a success, legal obstacles were to be overcome. Consequently, recently concluded agreements between ESA and the EU-Commission concerning the financial and governmental matters of the Galileo and GMES implementation feature a new approach to cooperation between these two organisations. However, the question remains if they can be taken as precedence for a future institutionalised cooperation? It follows that the agreements have to be analysed in order to understand how a mutually acceptable agreement was reached despite the disparity in the rules of both organisations. In this regard, especially the financial decision agreement concerning Galileo in December 2007 shows a very interesting and unique way in applying EU-competition law. In the same way, the GMES-Delegation Agreement of spring 2008 is a good example of how two different legal systems can be applied to make a project success. Additionally, the reasons and arguments of both organisations have to be considered, especially once the Treaty of Lisbon will be in force. As these two main projects of the European Space Policy are characterized by the desire for a successful European cooperation, they can be regarded as an important step forward for a new legal approach. A new system emerges which could be taken into consideration for further common projects undertaken by ESA and the EU.

Innovative learning model for improving students’ argumentation skill and concept understanding on science

Science.gov (United States)

Nafsiati Astuti, Rini

2018-04-01

Argumentation skill is the ability to compose and maintain arguments consisting of claims, supports for evidence, and strengthened-reasons. Argumentation is an important skill student needs to face the challenges of globalization in the 21st century. It is not an ability that can be developed by itself along with the physical development of human, but it must be developed under nerve like process, giving stimulus so as to require a person to be able to argue. Therefore, teachers should develop students’ skill of arguing in science learning in the classroom. The purpose of this study is to obtain an innovative learning model that are valid in terms of content and construct in improving the skills of argumentation and concept understanding of junior high school students. The assessment of content validity and construct validity was done through Focus Group Discussion (FGD), using the content and construct validation sheet, book model, learning video, and a set of learning aids for one meeting. Assessment results from 3 (three) experts showed that the learning model developed in the category was valid. The validity itself shows that the developed learning model has met the content requirement, the student needs, state of the art, strong theoretical and empirical foundation and construct validity, which has a connection of syntax stages and components of learning model so that it can be applied in the classroom activities

An Experiment in Mind-Mapping and Argument-Mapping: Tools for Assessing Outcomes in the Business Curriculum

Science.gov (United States)

Gargouri, Chanaz; Naatus, Mary Kate

2017-01-01

Distinguished from other teaching-learning tools, such as mind and concept mapping in which students draw pictures and concepts and show relationships and correlation between them to demonstrate their own understanding of complex concepts, argument mapping is used to demonstrate clarity of reasoning, based on supporting evidence, and come to a…

Revisiting the argument from fetal potential

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Manninen Bertha

2007-05-01

Full Text Available Abstract One of the most famous, and most derided, arguments against the morality of abortion is the argument from potential, which maintains that the fetus' potential to become a person and enjoy the valuable life common to persons, entails that its destruction is prima facie morally impermissible. In this paper, I will revisit and offer a defense of the argument from potential. First, I will criticize the classical arguments proffered against the importance of fetal potential, specifically the arguments put forth by philosophers Peter Singer and David Boonin, by carefully unpacking the claims made in these arguments and illustrating why they are flawed. Secondly, I will maintain that fetal potential is morally relevant when it comes to the morality of abortion, but that it must be accorded a proper place in the argument. This proper place, however, cannot be found until we first answer a very important and complex question: we must first address the issue of personal identity, and when the fetus becomes the type of being who is relevantly identical to a future person. I will illustrate why the question of fetal potential can only be meaningfully addressed after we have first answered the question of personal identity and how it relates to the human fetus.

Social Argumentation in Online Synchronous Communication

Science.gov (United States)

Alagoz, Esra

2013-01-01

The ability to argue well is a valuable skill for students in both formal and informal learning environments. While many studies have explored the argumentative practices in formal environments and some researchers have developed tools to enhance the argumentative skills, the social argumentation that is occurring in informal spaces has yet to be…

An economic and legal perspective on electric utility transition costs

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

Rose, K.

1996-07-01

The issue of possibly unrecoverable cost incurred by a utility, or `stranded costs,` has emerged as a major obstacle to developing a competitive generation market. Stranded or transition costs are defined as costs incurred by a utility to serve its customers that were being recovered in rates but are no longer due to availability of lower-priced alternative suppliers. The idea of `stranded cost,` and more importantly arguments for its recovery, is a concept with little basis in economic theory, legal precedence, or precedence in other deregulated industries. The main argument recovery is that the ``regulatory compact`` requires it. This is based on the misconception that the regulator compact is simply: the utility incurs costs on behalf of its customers because of the ``obligation to serve`` so, therefore, customers are obligated to pay. This is a mischaracterization of what the compact was and how it developed. Another argument is that recovery is required for economic efficiency. This presumes, however, a very narrow definition of efficiency based on preventing ``uneconomic`` bypass of the utility and that utilities minimize costs. A broader definition of efficiency and the likelihood of cost inefficiencies in the industry suggest that the cost imposed on customers from inhibiting competition could exceed the gains from preventing uneconomic bypass. Both these issues are examined in this paper.

Argument Strength and the Persuasiveness of Stories

Science.gov (United States)

Schreiner, Constanze; Appel, Markus; Isberner, Maj-Britt; Richter, Tobias

2017-01-01

ABSTRACT Stories are a powerful means to change people’s attitudes and beliefs. The aim of the current work was to shed light on the role of argument strength (argument quality) in narrative persuasion. The present study examined the influence of strong versus weak arguments on attitudes in a low or high narrative context. Moreover, baseline attitudes, interindividual differences in working memory capacity, and recipients’ transportation were examined. Stories with strong arguments were more persuasive than stories with weak arguments. This main effect was qualified by a two-way interaction with baseline attitude, revealing that argument strength had a greater impact on individuals who initially were particularly doubtful toward the story claim. Furthermore, we identified a three-way interaction showing that argument strength mattered most for recipients who were deeply transported into the story world in stories that followed a typical narrative structure. These findings provide an important specification of narrative persuasion theory. PMID:29805322

Reasons for omission of enforcement of an administrative judge's verdict and means of legal protection

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Alen Rajko

2015-01-01

Full Text Available Besides general repercussions of an omission of enforcement of court decisions on the protection of the rights of the parties and on the functioning of the legal system, such an omission in the administrative dispute has additional implications, related primarily to the realization of the constitutional guarantee of judicial review of administrative decisions, the concept of separation of powers, construction of a democratic state, etc. After general considerations of the matter of enforcement of court decisions, the author analyzes the normative framework of the enforcement of judgments of the administrative courts, as well as the evolution of this framework, points out the open questions regarding mentioned regulation, as well as the means of legal protection in case of an omission of enforcement of the verdict.

Teaching, the Legal Education and Carl Rogers Assumptions: A Case Study in a Private University

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Leonardo José Peixoto Leal

2015-12-01

of examination lawyers and tenders, existing today a new vision called "legal education crisis" in Brazil. According to Carl Rogers (1972, the main role of the teacher is not only to teach but to help the student to learn. This idea has been legitimized internationally since the publication of the UNESCO Report (Delors, 1998, when it pointed out that "learning to know" constitutes one of the pillars of contemporary education. Rogers (1972, in the 1960s,  drew up a list of 10 assumptions implicit deeply rooted among teachers, paradigms that should be addressed by teachers The methodology used was literature and documents with a qualitative approach in the case like an argument from Case Study, considering the Master in Law and the experiences of the Monitoring and Group Study Program. It concludes that the critical evaluation is important in the formation of the legal profession, because the legal education needs to renew itself, from a teaching practice centered learning.

L’argumentation dans le discours d’information médiatique Argumentation in Media Discourse

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Wander Emediato

2011-10-01

Full Text Available L’article présente quelques éléments de réflexion susceptibles de contribuer au développement d’une étude sur l’argumentation dans le discours d’information médiatique. Dans cette perspective, il poursuit deux objectifs complémentaires. L’un, d’ordre géneral, consiste à montrer comment les trois approches dominantes de l’argumentation (logique, linguistique et rhétorique sont à la fois différenciées, et étroitement imbriquées dans l’analyse du discours de presse. La seconde concerne le fonctionnement du discours d’information dans la presse et la façon dont il met en place, par des opérations de cadrage, d’effacement énonciatif, d’ellipses, etc. une « dimension argumentative » (Amossy 2000 : sans avoir une visée argumentative avouée, il se propose néanmoins d’agir sur les croyances et les représentations du lecteur. A titre d’exemple, l’étude traite d’un corpus de titres empruntés essentiellement à la presse brésilienne.This paper aims at contributing to the development of argumentation studies in the field of media discourse, and within this perspective, it presents two main complementary objectives. Firstly, it strives at showing how the three main approaches to argumentation (logical, linguistic and rhetoric are both distinct and closely interconnected in the analysis of media discourse. The second objective concerns the functioning of the selected genre of discourse: the paper examines how, through procedures of framing, obliteration of the enunciative modality, ellipses, etc., media discourse sets up an “argumentative dimension” (Amossy 2000. Although not overtly intended for persuasion, media discourse nevertheless sets out to act upon the reader’s beliefs and representations. These issues are tackled through the analysis of a sample of headlines mostly borrowed from the Brazilian press.

Phronesis, clinical reasoning, and Pellegrino's philosophy of medicine.

Science.gov (United States)

Davis, F D

1997-01-01

In terms of Aristotle's intellectual virtues, the process of clinical reasoning and the discipline of clinical medicine are often construed as techne (art), as episteme (science), or as an amalgam or composite of techne and episteme. Although dimensions of process and discipline are appropriately described in these terms, I argue that phronesis (practical reasoning) provides the most compelling paradigm, particularly of the rationality of the physician's knowing and doing in the clinical encounter with the patient. I anchor this argument, moreover, in Pellegrino's philosophy of medicine as a healing relationship, oriented to the end of a right and good healing action for the individual patient.

L'argumentation dans la langue (Argumentation in Language)

Science.gov (United States)

Anscombre, J. C.; Ducrot, O.

1976-01-01

Questions the current distinction between semantics and pragmatics, and develops a theory of "argumentative scales" (Ducrot 1973), as well as a semantic model with three components and a revision of the notion of "illocutionary." (Text is in French.) (CDSH/AM)

Teacher Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK) and Students’ Reasoning and Wellbeing

Science.gov (United States)

Widodo, A.

2017-02-01

This paper summarizes findings of a study on efforts to improve teachers Pedagogical Content Knowledge and how it affects students’ reasoning and wellbeing. It was found that improvement of teachers’ PCK was not very strong but we managed to develop strategies to facilitate their developments. In the second year, the research was focused on identifying students’ reasoning skills both informal reasoning and formal reasoning. Data showed that students reasoning is relatively low (level 2 of five levels) and they could not construct highly coherence arguments. In addition alternative strategies to promote students’ reasoning were explored. Attempts to support teachers to conduct lessons that facilitate students’ reasoning found that teachers need intensive and continuous support. The study also identifies students’ wellbeing as the impact of improvement of lessons and other activities designed to improve students’ wellbeing. Research on students’ wellbeing is not yet given attention in Indonesian schools although it plays very important roles in students’ academic and nonacademic achievements.

Rhétorique et argumentation : approches croisées Current Approaches to Rhetoric and Argumentation

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Roselyne Koren

2009-04-01

Full Text Available 1. Considérations théoriques (Ruth AmossyL’intérêt croissant qui se manifeste aujourd’hui pour l’argumentation dans les études francophones n’est pas sans appeler quelques clarifications. Ducrot, qui a joué un rôle déterminant dans le regain des études argumentatives en France, s’y est récemment employé en différenciant nettement ce qu’il appelle « l’argumentation linguistique » et « l’argumentation rhétorique ». La première, dont il est l’un des promoteurs et le tenant, se définit contre « ...

The Cartoon Controversy: Offence, Identity, Oppression?

DEFF Research Database (Denmark)

Lægaard, Sune

2007-01-01

such publications to be wrong, and asks whether they provide plausible moral reasons against such publications, and whether they justify legal restrictions on freedom of speech. The arguments concern: (a) the consistent extension of group defamation legislation to cover Muslims; (b) offence to religious...

Improving the argumentative skills of high school students through teacher’s questioning techniques and argumentative assessment

Science.gov (United States)

Kristianti, T. P.; Ramli, M.; Ariyanto, J.

2018-05-01

This research aims to know how students’ argumentative skills improved by applying teacher’s questioning techniques and argumentative assessment through collaborative action research between college student who did teaching practicum, biology teacher as tutor teacher, and lecturers. The action research was done in three cycles involving one class consisted of 36 eleventh graders. Lesson plans were developed collaboratively, and teaching practices were by the student teacher. In the reflective phase prior to the first cycle, learning processes were dominated by the teacher, hence students did not have sufficient opportunity to argue. Students were divided into two, 14 students were grouped as low achievement (LA) and 22 students were the high achievement (HA). Teacher questions and students’ responses were furtherly coded and interpreted following the validated rubric of level of argumentation. A divergent essay as an argumentative assessment was also tested to students at the end of each cycle. At the end of the third cycle, HA and LA students showed a significant change in argumentative skills responded the teacher’s questions. However, only four LA students who actively argued. Students from HA groups also showed the improvement on the level of argumentation, where they move from level 1 to 3.

Legal aspects of radiation therapy in Republic of Belarus

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Gatskevich, G.V.; Tarutin, I.G.; Khoruzhik, S.A.

2014-01-01

The reasons that lead to harm to patients during radiotherapy considered. Some examples of radiation damage presented. The types of liability for harm to the patient used in the Republic of Belarus described. The recommendations to ensure legal protection for medical and technical personnel suggested

A critical review of the dominant lines of argumentation on the need for strategic environmental assessment

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Bina, Olivia

2007-01-01

In spite of almost two decades of experience, Strategic Environmental Assessment's (SEA) foundations remain unclear to the point that the case for needing an instrument called 'SEA' could be questioned. The aim is to ask: what problems was SEA meant to solve, and what needs was it meant to address, by reflecting on the strengths and weaknesses of SEA thinking to date. I do so by organising the reasons and arguments offered by scholars and practitioners under three 'lines of argumentation' related to the strategic dimension of SEA, its methods and purpose. I explore how each line of argumentation affects the concept of (the purpose and role) and approach to (the procedures, methods and tools) SEA. The problematisation of these arguments and their evolution makes a case for the urgent acknowledgment of misleading simplifications. From this analysis I propose a number of promising fields of inquiry that could help respond to the growing expectations attached to SEA and strengthen its 'strategic' dimension: revisiting the concept of assessment in SEA, promoting strategies for the introduction of SEA, and strengthening the contribution of theory to SEA practice

The Use and Effectiveness of an Argumentation and Evaluation Intervention in Science Classes

Science.gov (United States)

Bulgren, Janis A.; Ellis, James D.; Marquis, Janet G.

2014-02-01

This study explored teachers' use of the Argumentation and Evaluation Intervention (AEI) and associated graphic organizer to enhance the performance of students in middle and secondary science classrooms. The results reported here are from the third year of a design study during which the procedures were developed in collaboration with teachers. A quasi-experimental pretest-posttest design with 8 experimental and 8 control teachers was used with a total of 282 students. An open-ended test assessed students' abilities to evaluate a scientific argument made in an article. The students were asked to identify the claim and its qualifiers, identify and evaluate the evidence given for the claim, examine the reasoning in support of the claim, consider counterarguments, and construct and explain a conclusion about the claim. The quality of students' responses was assessed using a scoring rubric for each step of the argumentation process. Findings indicated a significantly higher overall score and large effect size in favor of students who were instructed using the AEI compared to students who received traditional lecture-discussion instruction. Subgroup and subscale scores are also presented. Teacher satisfaction and student satisfaction and confidence levels are reported.

THE LEGALITY OF DIVORCE IN THE PERSPECTIVE OF HADITH

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Ridwan Hasbi

2016-05-01

Full Text Available Cerai talak (formula for divorce and Cerai gugat (sue for divorce are two terms of termination of marriage bond in Indonesia. The formula of divorce is a term that coincides with a divorce coming from the will of a husband and sue for divorce is the desire of a wife to separate from her husband. Islamic Law legalizes the right of wives in cases of divorce redeem (khulu‘ and fasakh because of syiqaq. On the other side, there are signs setting the rights up, so that the given reasons to use the rights must be legal in syar‘i. The reasons for the legality of divorce is a common-cause factor, so that the banning with threatening hadiths as well as those of the hadiths that say wives must obey their husbands, the wives should not hurt their husband and the wives are prisoners of husbands are all categorized into general. At another angle, there also the hadiths concerning with the status a couple husband and wife is heaven and hell for them in a household. Contextualization of hadiths that ban a wife asking for divorce without any legal cause from Syar‘i, and also those of the hadiths legalize khulu‘ are the realization of the conjugal lives with regards to the mandate of Allah and religious values. The facts of a wife sue for divorce to her husband are the conditions related to a confusion occurred in a household which are influenced by a variety of factors, i.g. economy, adultery, polygamy, social strata and others. A sue for divorce which is Syar’i based condition is a disagreement prolonged strife after peace held between the two sides and act endangers a wife

Intellectual property arguments in tobacco industry legal challenges: lessons from recently concluded cases

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Suzanne Zhou

2018-03-01

A substantial body of jurisprudence now confirms that IP does not provide the scope of protection commonly claimed by the industry. Tobacco control practitioners faced with such arguments can be confident that they are unfounded. Country / measure / jurisdiction Australia - plain packaging (WTO dispute settlement system Australia - plain packaging (High Court of Australia Australia - plain packaging (investor-state arbitration Uruguay - restrictions on brand variants and 80% graphic health warnings (investor-state arbitration United Kingdom - standardised packaging (Court of Appeal of England and Wales IP issues Obligation to provide certain trademark protections under TRIPS Protection of trademark as property under constitution Expropriation of trademark as investment under treaty; fair and equitable treatment re treatment of trademarks Expropriation of trademark as investment under treaty; fair and equitable treatment re treatment of trademarks Obligation to provide certain trademark protections under TRIPS and EU law; protection of trademark as property under European and UK law Decided in favour of Pending, reportedly Australia Australia, 2012 Australia, 2015 (dismissed at jurisdictional stage Uruguay, 2016 United Kingdom, 2016 Positive right to use trademark? Pending, point conceded as 'no' by complainants No Not decided No No Public health justification Pending Not applicable Not decided Yes Yes [Recent cases raising trademark issues

The Relationship of Discipline Background to Upper Secondary Students' Argumentation on Socioscientific Issues

Science.gov (United States)

Christenson, Nina; Chang Rundgren, Shu-Nu; Zeidler, Dana L.

2014-08-01

In the present STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics)-driven society, socioscientific issues (SSI) have become a focus globally and SSI research has grown into an important area of study in science education. Since students attending the social and science programs have a different focus in their studies and research has shown that students attending a science program are less familiar with argumentation practice, we make a comparison of the supporting reasons social science and science majors use in arguing different SSI with the goal to provide important information for pedagogical decisions about curriculum and instruction. As an analytical framework, a model termed SEE-SEP covering three aspects (of knowledge, value, and experiences) and six subject areas (of sociology/culture, economy, environment/ecology, science, ethics/morality, and policy) was adopted to analyze students' justifications. A total of 208 upper secondary students (105 social science majors and 103 science majors) from Sweden were invited to justify and expound their arguments on four SSI including global warming, genetically modified organisms (GMO), nuclear power, and consumer consumption. The results showed that the social science majors generated more justifications than the science majors, the aspect of value was used most in students' argumentation regardless of students' discipline background, and justifications from the subject area of science were most often presented in nuclear power and GMO issues. We conclude by arguing that engaging teachers from different subjects to cooperate when teaching argumentation on SSI could be of great value and provide students from both social science and science programs the best possible conditions in which to develop argumentation skills.

Argumentation not emotion

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Koerber, H.

1984-01-01

The controversy about the introduction and extension of the peaceful use of nuclear energy has been going on in the Federal Republic of Germany and other countries for a number of years. The intensity with which it was conducted has changed frequently, varying topics were discussed, and shifting aims formed the object of resistance. Often emotion took the place of sober pro and con. There was increasing repression of points made, both on the part of the opponents of nuclear energy and its advocates. Endeavours to free the controversy from emotion are a prerequisite of sober analysis and a balanced judgement on questions of the energy supply of this country. The call for points is to be complied with by this book. To the emotional contentions and statements made in the course of the nuclear energy discussion the author opposes sober arguments. To corroborate the argumentation and make it verifiable a compilation of facts was appended, which corresponds to the main part of the book, provides further information and establishes connections to related problems. A register of important technical terms and their definitions and a bibliography round off the information and argumentation potential. The book is addressed to all - opponents and supporters alike - who want to deal unemotionally with the pro and con of nuclear energy. It provides useful aids for argumentation and the framing of opinions to anybody participating in the discussion at the level of politics, economy, education and society. Last not least it is helpful as a source of information and reference book on questions of energy supply. (orig.) [de

Against a singular understanding of legal capacity: Criminal responsibility and the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities

Science.gov (United States)

Craigie, Jillian

2015-01-01

The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) is being used to argue for wider recognition of the legal capacity of people with mental disabilities. This raises a question about the implications of the Convention for attributions of criminal responsibility. The present paper works towards an answer by analysing the relationship between legal capacity in relation to personal decisions and criminal acts. Its central argument is that because moral and political considerations play an essential role in setting the relevant standards, legal capacity in the context of personal decisions and criminal acts should not be thought of as two sides of the same coin. The implications of particular moral or political norms are likely to be different in these two legal contexts, and this may justify asymmetries in the relevant standards for legal capacity. However, the analysis highlights a fundamental question about how much weight moral or political considerations should be given in setting these standards, and this is used to frame a challenge to those calling for significantly wider recognition of the legal capacity of people with mental disabilities on the basis of the Convention. PMID:25997381

Against a singular understanding of legal capacity: Criminal responsibility and the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.

Science.gov (United States)

Craigie, Jillian

2015-01-01

The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) is being used to argue for wider recognition of the legal capacity of people with mental disabilities. This raises a question about the implications of the Convention for attributions of criminal responsibility. The present paper works towards an answer by analysing the relationship between legal capacity in relation to personal decisions and criminal acts. Its central argument is that because moral and political considerations play an essential role in setting the relevant standards, legal capacity in the context of personal decisions and criminal acts should not be thought of as two sides of the same coin. The implications of particular moral or political norms are likely to be different in these two legal contexts, and this may justify asymmetries in the relevant standards for legal capacity. However, the analysis highlights a fundamental question about how much weight moral or political considerations should be given in setting these standards, and this is used to frame a challenge to those calling for significantly wider recognition of the legal capacity of people with mental disabilities on the basis of the Convention. Copyright © 2015. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Towards a more explicit writing pedagogy: The complexity of teaching argumentative writing

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Jacqui Dornbrack

2014-04-01

Full Text Available Advances in technology, changes in communication practices, and the imperatives of the workplace have led to the repositioning of the role of writing in the global context. This has implications for the teaching of writing in schools. This article focuses on the argumentative essay, which is a high-stakes genre. A sample of work from one Grade 10 student identified as high performing in a township school in Cape Town (South Africa is analysed. Drawing on the work of Ormerod and Ivanic, who argue that writing practices can be inferred from material artifacts, as well as critical discourse analysis, we show that the argumentative genre is complex, especially for novice first additional language English writers. This complexity is confounded by the conflation of the process and genre approaches in the Curriculum and Assessment Policy Statement (CAPS document. Based on the analysis we discuss the implications of planning, particularly in relation to thinking and reasoning, the need to read in order to write argument and how social and school capital are insufficient without explicit instruction of the conventions of this complex genre. These findings present some insights into particular input needed to improve writing pedagogy for specific genres.

Alzheimer's disease and the law: positive and negative consequences of structural stigma and labeling in the legal system.

Science.gov (United States)

Werner, Perla; Doron, Israel Issi

2017-11-01

To explore the meaning and consequences of labeling on structural stigma in the context of Alzheimer's disease (AD) in the legal system. This qualitative study was made up of three focus groups including social workers and lawyers (n = 26). Participants were asked to report their experience in circumstances in which persons with AD and their family members engage with the legal system. Thematic analysis using the constant comparative method was used. The discussions in the focus groups raised two overall themes. (1) The significance of the medical diagnostic labeling of AD in the legal system and (2) the consequences of labeling of AD within the legal system. This last theme included four sub-themes: (a) negative consequences of labeling; (b) reasons associated with negative consequences of labeling; (c) positive consequences of labeling; and (d) reasons associated with positive consequences of labeling. Findings of the study provide a first foundation for future research on the meaning and consequences of labeling in legal cases involving persons with AD. They suggest that increasing judges' knowledge about AD and reforming the existing 'status-based' legal capacity legislation might benefit by limiting the legal weight given today to the medical diagnosis.

'You are inferior!' Revisiting the expressivist argument.

Science.gov (United States)

Hofmann, Bjørn

2017-09-01

According to the expressivist argument the choice to use biotechnologies to prevent the birth of individuals with specific disabilities is an expression of disvalue for existing people with this disability. The argument has stirred a lively debate and has recently received renewed attention. This article starts with presenting the expressivist argument and its core elements. It then goes on to present and examine the counter-arguments before it addresses some aspects that have gained surprisingly little attention. The analysis demonstrates that the expressivist argument has a wide range of underpinnings and that counter-arguments tend to focus on only a few of these. It also reveals an important aspect that appears to have been ignored, i.e., that people do not select foetuses based on chromosomes or other biological traits, but based on characteristics of living persons with specific disabilities. This makes it more difficult to undermine the claim that negative selection of foetuses expresses a disvaluing of persons with such disabilities. It leaves the expressivist argument with a strong bite still. © 2017 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Inductive reasoning.

Science.gov (United States)

Hayes, Brett K; Heit, Evan; Swendsen, Haruka

2010-03-01

Inductive reasoning entails using existing knowledge or observations to make predictions about novel cases. We review recent findings in research on category-based induction as well as theoretical models of these results, including similarity-based models, connectionist networks, an account based on relevance theory, Bayesian models, and other mathematical models. A number of touchstone empirical phenomena that involve taxonomic similarity are described. We also examine phenomena involving more complex background knowledge about premises and conclusions of inductive arguments and the properties referenced. Earlier models are shown to give a good account of similarity-based phenomena but not knowledge-based phenomena. Recent models that aim to account for both similarity-based and knowledge-based phenomena are reviewed and evaluated. Among the most important new directions in induction research are a focus on induction with uncertain premise categories, the modeling of the relationship between inductive and deductive reasoning, and examination of the neural substrates of induction. A common theme in both the well-established and emerging lines of induction research is the need to develop well-articulated and empirically testable formal models of induction. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. For further resources related to this article, please visit the WIREs website. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Understanding ill-structured engineering ethics problems through a collaborative learning and argument visualization approach.

Science.gov (United States)

Hoffmann, Michael; Borenstein, Jason

2014-03-01

As a committee of the National Academy of Engineering recognized, ethics education should foster the ability of students to analyze complex decision situations and ill-structured problems. Building on the NAE's insights, we report about an innovative teaching approach that has two main features: first, it places the emphasis on deliberation and on self-directed, problem-based learning in small groups of students; and second, it focuses on understanding ill-structured problems. The first innovation is motivated by an abundance of scholarly research that supports the value of deliberative learning practices. The second results from a critique of the traditional case-study approach in engineering ethics. A key problem with standard cases is that they are usually described in such a fashion that renders the ethical problem as being too obvious and simplistic. The practitioner, by contrast, may face problems that are ill-structured. In the collaborative learning environment described here, groups of students use interactive and web-based argument visualization software called "AGORA-net: Participate - Deliberate!". The function of the software is to structure communication and problem solving in small groups. Students are confronted with the task of identifying possible stakeholder positions and reconstructing their legitimacy by constructing justifications for these positions in the form of graphically represented argument maps. The argument maps are then presented in class so that these stakeholder positions and their respective justifications become visible and can be brought into a reasoned dialogue. Argument mapping provides an opportunity for students to collaborate in teams and to develop critical thinking and argumentation skills.

Family Arguments

Science.gov (United States)

... Spread the Word Shop AAP Find a Pediatrician Family Life Medical Home Family Dynamics Adoption & Foster Care ... Life Listen Español Text Size Email Print Share Family Arguments Page Content Article Body We seem to ...

Rhetoric and Essentially Contested Arguments

Science.gov (United States)

Garver, Eugene

1978-01-01

Draws a connection between Gallie's essentially contested concepts and Aristotle's account of rhetorical argument by presenting a definition of Essentially Contested Argument which is used as the connecting term between rhetoric and essentially contested concepts and by demonstrating the value of making this connection. (JF)

Cyberspace in the Curricula: New Legal and Ethical Issues.

Science.gov (United States)

Smethers, J. Steven

1998-01-01

Finds that most journalism and mass communication programs integrate legal and ethical issues surrounding cyberspace and interactive media into existing courses, especially into ethics and communication law courses, but also into introductory survey courses, communication technology, and reporting classes. Details reasons why some programs do not…

Science, truth, and forensic cultures: the exceptional legal status of DNA evidence.

Science.gov (United States)

Lynch, Michael

2013-03-01

Many epistemological terms, such as investigation, inquiry, argument, evidence, and fact were established in law well before being associated with science. However, while legal proof remained qualified by standards of 'moral certainty', scientific proof attained a reputation for objectivity. Although most forms of legal evidence (including expert evidence) continue to be treated as fallible 'opinions' rather than objective 'facts', forensic DNA evidence increasingly is being granted an exceptional factual status. It did not always enjoy such status. Two decades ago, the scientific status of forensic DNA evidence was challenged in the scientific literature and in courts of law, but by the late 1990s it was being granted exceptional legal status. This paper reviews the ascendancy of DNA profiling, and argues that its widely-heralded objective status is bound up with systems of administrative accountability. The 'administrative objectivity' of DNA evidence rests upon observable and reportable bureaucratic rules, records, recording devices, protocols, and architectural arrangements. By highlighting administrative sources of objectivity, this paper suggests that DNA evidence remains bound within the context of ordinary organisational and practical routines, and is not a transcendent source of 'truth' in the criminal justice system. Copyright © 2012. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

The National Security Agency (NSA eavesdropping on Americans
A programme that is neither legal nor necessary

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Zmarak Khan

2006-12-01

Full Text Available On 16 December 2005, the New York Times reported that the President had authorized the National Security Agency (NSA to spy on Americans, inside the United States, without first obtaining a warrant from the secret FISA court. Although the President has described the NSA activities to be legal and critical to our national security, the programme has started a national controversy, raising questions over its legality and necessity. Consequently, there have been pending legal challenges, congressional investigations, and public outcry over the use of such expansive presidential authority. The legal community, including the American Bar Association, considers the programme illegal. The only district court that has addressed the issue has held it to be an unconstitutional programme that violates FISA. This comment highlights several reasons for why warrantless wiretapping is illegal and unnecessary. The comment also notes public policy reasons against presidential power that is not subject to any checks from Congress or review from the judiciary. Finally, it argues that the President needs to immediately cease the programme; asks Congress to take its oversight responsibility more seriously; and reasons that the judicial review protects against abuse.

Caspian oil and Azerbaijan foreign policy: analyse of Azerbaijanese arguments

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Gurbanov, T.

2005-03-01

Since Azerbaijan's independence, He decided to use its natural resources for strengthening the bases of a new state and signed 21 massive oil contracts with 35 companies of 21 different countries. Our research aims to analyse the Azerbaijanis' arguments related to Caspian oil through its foreign policy, by economic, legal and geopolitical axes. Oil has a fundamental place in the country's economy, as it is Azerbaijan's Gross Product. The treaties of 1921 and 1940 do not regulate the question concerning the common use of the resources of the Caspian Sea. Therefore, it became urgent to define new status related to divide the sea by median line into national sectors according to the equidistance principles. As the oil is a 'political game' between foreign powers, Azerbaijan tries to take the benefice from this 'New great game' by transforming the country into a zone of cooperation. (author)

Emotional and cognitive stimuli differentially engage the default network during inductive reasoning

OpenAIRE

Eldaief, Mark C.; Deckersbach, Thilo; Carlson, Lindsay E.; Beucke, Jan C.; Dougherty, Darin D.

2011-01-01

The brain’s default network (DN) is comprised of several cortical regions demonstrating robust intrinsic connectivity at rest. The authors sought to examine the differential effects of emotional reasoning and reasoning under certainty upon the DN through the employment of an event-related fMRI design in healthy participants. Participants were presented with syllogistic arguments which were organized into a 2 × 2 factorial design in which the first factor was emotional salience and the second ...

Argumentation skill profile using “Toulmin Argumentation Pattern” analysis of high school student at Subang on topic hydrostatic pressure

Science.gov (United States)

Syerliana, L.; Muslim; Setiawan, W.

2018-05-01

This study aims to know profile of argumentation skill high school student at Kabupaten Subang. To achieve this goal, researcher conducted a descriptive study to analysis student test results of argumentation skill of 35 students XII SMAN. Data collection using argumentation test which has validation by expert and then it is analyzed using TAP (Toulmin Argumentation Pattern) which consist of some components such a data, claim, warrant, backing, and rebuttal on the topic of hydrostatic pressure. The method used in this research is descriptive method. The result of this research show the student’s scientific argumentation skill is still low, this is proven by 54% average claim score, 38% data, 29% warrant, 35% backing and 35% rebuttal. These findings will serve as a basis for further research on innovative learning models that can improve students’ argumentation skill.

Disentangling The Thick Concept Argument

DEFF Research Database (Denmark)

Blomberg, Olle

2007-01-01

Critics argue that non-cognitivism cannot adequately account for the existence and nature of some thick moral concepts. They use the existence of thick concepts as a lever in an argument against non-cognitivism, here called the Thick Concept Argument (TCA). While TCA is frequently invoked...

Craig and Kalam Cosmological Argument

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Gholamhosein Tavacoly

2011-08-01

Full Text Available Among different arguments for the existence of God the Kalam cosmological argument is a very famous one which is elaborated by Professor William lane Craig. Craig claims that the universe began to exist , then he continues to say: everything that begins to exist has a cause and therefore the universe has a cause. But how do we know that the universe began to exist? This premise forms the most important part of Craig’s contention, and he bolsters it by four arguments, the first two are driven from philosophy and the other two, which he prefers to name them “confirmations from sciences” are driven from sciences the first one evokes to big bang theory and the seconds to the second principle of thermodynamic which are respectively adopted from cosmology and physics.   In this essay we are going to survey Craig’s arguments and estimate their value and weight.

Craig and Kalam Cosmological Argument

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Gholamhosein Tavacoly

2011-09-01

Full Text Available   Among different arguments for the existence of God the Kalam cosmological argument is a very famous one which is elaborated by Professor William lane Craig. Craig claims that the universe began to exist , then he continues to say: everything that begins to exist has a cause and therefore the universe has a cause. But how do we know that the universe began to exist? This premise forms the most important part of Craig’s contention, and he bolsters it by four arguments, the first two are driven from philosophy and the other two, which he prefers to name them “confirmations from sciences” are driven from sciences the first one evokes to big bang theory and the seconds to the second principle of thermodynamic which are respectively adopted from cosmology and physics.   In this essay we are going to survey Craig’s arguments and estimate their value and weight.

Craig and Kalam Cosmological Argument

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Tavacoli, Gh

2011-01-01

Full Text Available Among different arguments for the existence of God the Kalam cosmological argument is a very famous one which is elaborated by Professor William lane Craig. Craig claims that the universe began to exist, then he continues to say: everything that begins to exist has a cause and therefore the universe has a cause. But how do we know that the universe began to exist? This premise forms the most important part of Craig’s contention, and he bolsters it by four arguments, the first two are driven from philosophy and the other two, which he prefers to name them “confirmations from sciences” are driven from sciences; the first one evokes to big bang theory and the seconds to the second principle of thermodynamic which are respectively adopted from cosmology and physics.In this essay we are going to survey Craig’s arguments and estimate their value and weight.

Argument types about the notion of reversibility in the management of radioactive wastes - ANDRA EHESS convention, final report

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Cezanne-Bert, Pierrick; Chateauraynaud, Francis

2009-01-01

Whereas the creation authorization of a deep geological storage centre will be able to be awarded only after a law defining reversibility conditions, this document reports the study of the different argument and speech types about the notion of reversibility in the management of nuclear wastes. This study is based on 2.360 texts and 17 interviews with the main actors of this issue. After a description of this corpus, the authors analyze the reversibility notion in terms of technological innovation, legal constraint, and protest forms. They identify the main trends and possible emerging conflicts

Economic Justification of Patents and Exceptions to Patentability

DEFF Research Database (Denmark)

Nordberg, Ana

2012-01-01

The present article is the conclusion of a review of economic justifications for patent rights conducted with the objective of determining whether such arguments are per se capable of sustaining the existence of a different patentability regime for inventions of methods for treatment and diagnostic...... methods (art.53 (c) European Patent Convention). It starts by exploring the normative background and summarily describes the different types of claims allowed under the current legal framework and their differences. The following sections will describe and apply the main economic arguments sustaining...... patent rights inventions of methods for treatment and diagnostic methods. These reasoning will be later confronted with contra-arguments. This piece will finalize with the formulation of conclusions extracted from the previous debate, inter-alia that economic reasoning does not per se sustain...

Incidence of legal abortion in Sweden after the Chernobyl accident

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Odlind, V.; Ericson, A.

1991-01-01

The number of legal abortions in Sweden increased around the time of the Chernobyl accident, particularly in the summer and autumn of 1986. Although there was no recording of reasons for legal abortions, one might have suspected this increase to be a result of fear and anxiety after the accident. However, seen over a longer time perspective, the increase in the number of abortions started before and continued far beyond the time of the accident. There was also a simultaneous and pronounced increase in the number of births during the years subsequent to the accident. Therefore, it seems unlikely that fear of the consequences of radioactive fall-out after the Chernobyl accident resulted in any substantial increase of the number of legal abortions in Sweden

Preconception sex selection for non-medical and intermediate reasons: ethical reflections

OpenAIRE

de Wert, G.; Dondorp, W.

2010-01-01

Sex selection for non-medical reasons is forbidden in many countries. Focusing on preconception sex selection, the authors first observe that it is unclear what should count as a ‘medical reason’ in this context and argue for the existence of ‘intermediate reasons’ that do not fit well within the rigid distinction between ‘medical’and ‘non-medical’. The article further provides a critical review of the arguments for the prohibition of sex selection for non-medical reasons and finds that none ...

MEDICAL ERROR: CIVIL AND LEGAL ASPECT.

Science.gov (United States)

Buletsa, S; Drozd, O; Yunin, O; Mohilevskyi, L

2018-03-01

The scientific article is focused on the research of the notion of medical error, medical and legal aspects of this notion have been considered. The necessity of the legislative consolidation of the notion of «medical error» and criteria of its legal estimation have been grounded. In the process of writing a scientific article, we used the empirical method, general scientific and comparative legal methods. A comparison of the concept of medical error in civil and legal aspects was made from the point of view of Ukrainian, European and American scientists. It has been marked that the problem of medical errors is known since ancient times and in the whole world, in fact without regard to the level of development of medicine, there is no country, where doctors never make errors. According to the statistics, medical errors in the world are included in the first five reasons of death rate. At the same time the grant of medical services practically concerns all people. As a man and his life, health in Ukraine are acknowledged by a higher social value, medical services must be of high-quality and effective. The grant of not quality medical services causes harm to the health, and sometimes the lives of people; it may result in injury or even death. The right to the health protection is one of the fundamental human rights assured by the Constitution of Ukraine; therefore the issue of medical errors and liability for them is extremely relevant. The authors make conclusions, that the definition of the notion of «medical error» must get the legal consolidation. Besides, the legal estimation of medical errors must be based on the single principles enshrined in the legislation and confirmed by judicial practice.

Similarity Arguments in the Genetic Modification Debate

DEFF Research Database (Denmark)

Christiansen, Andreas

2017-01-01

In the ethical debate on genetic modification (GM), it is common to encounter the claim that some anti-GM argument would also apply an established, ethically accepted technology, and that the anti-GM argument is therefore unsuccessful. The paper discusses whether this argumentative strategy, the ...

Discrimination of legal entities: Phenomenological characteristics and legal protection

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Petrušić Nevena

2017-01-01

Full Text Available Their social nature encourages people to associate and jointly achieve the goals that they would not be able to achieve individually. Legal entities are created as one of the legal modalities of that association, as separate entities that have their own legal personality independent of the subjectivity of their members. Legal entities are holders of some human rights, depending on the nature of the right, including the right to non-discrimination. All mechanisms envisaged for legal protection against discrimination in the national legislation are available to legal persons. On the other hand, the situation is quite different in terms of access to international forums competent to deal with cases of discrimination. Legal entities do not have access to some international forums, while they may have access to others under the same conditions prescribed for natural persons. Legal entities may be exposed to various forms of direct and indirect discrimination both in the private and in the public sphere of social relations. Phenomenological characteristics of discrimination against legal persons are not substantially different from discrimination against individuals. There are no significant differences regarding the application of discrimination test in cases of discrimination of legal entities as compared to the use of this test in cases involving discrimination of natural persons or groups of persons. Legal entities may be discriminated against on the basis of characteristics of their legal personality, such as those which are objective elements of the legal entity and part of its legal identity. Discrimination of legal entities may be based on personal characteristics of its members (i.e. people who make a personal essence of a legal entity because their characteristics can be 'transferred' to the legal entity and become part of its identity. Legal entities should also be protected from this special form of transferred (associative discrimination.

Theoretical Issues of Legal Regulation of Municipal Solid Waste Handling

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Altynbekkyzy Alua

2017-06-01

Full Text Available The relevance of comparative analysis of legal regulation of environmental protection is due to several reasons. Firstly, it expands the boundaries of interpretation of legal norms and acts of environmental law. Secondly, it allows relying on experience in the latest achievements of legislative activity in developed countries. Thirdly, taking into consideration the legislative mistakes of other countries, it helps to avoid similar mistakes in the process of improving Kazakh legislation. And finally, it is the starting point for multilateral and bilateral cooperation in the field of environmental law.

Introduction and framing of electricity capacity markets. Legal requirements and boundaries; Einfuehrung und Ausgestaltung von Strom-Kapazitaetsmaerkten. Rechtliche Anforderungen und Grenzen

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

Daeuper, Olaf; Grundmann, Malte [Becker Buettner Held, Berlin (Germany)

2012-12-15

A lively discussion is currently being waged as to whether the electricity markets in their existing design can sustain our future security of supply and how this might be accomplished with future market designs using what are referred to as capacity mechanisms. However, the discussion is largely being conducted from the viewpoint of energy economy, in negligence of the legal constraints and requirements that must form the basis for any promotion mechanism in favour of existing or new installations. A wealth of legal regulations exists which must be taken into account here, ranging from primary European law down to the relevant national laws. Which model ultimately prevails will depend not so much on legal arguments as it will on ones phrased in terms of energy economy. When this has been achieved however, if not earlier, the importance of a legal framework for the market will become apparent.

Humanist Principles Underlying Philosophy of Argument

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

George Boger

2008-02-01

Full Text Available This discussion reviews the thinking of some prominent philosophers of argument to extract principles common to their thinking. It shows that a growing concern with dialogical pragmatics is better appreciated as a part of applied ethics than of applied epistemology. The discussion concludes by indicating a possible consequence for philosophy of argument and invites further discussion by asking whether argumentation philosophy has an implicit, underlying moral, or even political, posture.

Definitional Arguments in Children’s Speech

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Rebecca Schar

2017-07-01

Full Text Available Based on the debate on children’s ability to produce argumentative discourse in different edu­cational settings, this paper provides further support for the fact that small children are able to support their opinions with arguments. In particular, the paper makes a case in point on children’s appeal to definitional loci, when supporting their standpoints. The analysis of their reasoning’s implicit components shows how children apply different definitional arguments.

Modelling group decision simulation through argumentation

OpenAIRE

Marreiros, Goreti; Novais, Paulo; Machado, José; Ramos, Carlos; Neves, José

2007-01-01

Group decision making plays an important role in today’s organisations. The impact of decision making is so high and complex, that rarely the decision making process is made individually. In Group Decision Argumentation, there is a set of participants, with different profiles and expertise levels, that exchange ideas or engage in a process of argumentation and counter-argumentation, negotiate, cooperate, collaborate or even discuss techniques and/or methodologies for problem solving. In this ...

A Viewpoint Approach to Structured Argumentation

OpenAIRE

Tamani, Nouredine; Croitoru, Madalina; Buche, Patrice

2013-01-01

We introduce in this paper a viewpoint-based argumentation approach in the context of the EcoBioCap project, which requirements are different actor arguments expressed over several criteria, describing the objects of a domain, to support/oppose contradictory goals. A viewpoint is an ASPIC+ argumentation system defined over a subset of rules corresponding to a single criterion. Concepts of conflict between viewpoints, independent viewpoints, and collection of independent viewpoints are the bas...

Negligence--When Is the Principal Liable? A Legal Memorandum.

Science.gov (United States)

Stern, Ralph D., Ed.

Negligence, a tort liability, is defined, discussed, and reviewed in relation to several court decisions involving school principals. The history of liability suits against school principals suggests that a reasonable, prudent principal can avoid legal problems. Ten guidelines are presented to assist principals in avoiding charges of negligence.…

Combining Paraconsistent Logic with Argumentation

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Grooters, Diana; Prakken, Hendrik

2014-01-01

One tradition in the logical study of argumentation is to allow for arguments that combine strict and defeasible inference rules, and to derive the strict inference rules from a logic at least as strong as classical logic. An unsolved problem in this tradition is how the trivialising effect of the

Brazilian legal and bioethical approach about donation for research and patents of human body parts.

Science.gov (United States)

Fernandes, Márcia Santana; Silla, Lúcia; Goldim, José Roberto; Martins-Costa, Judith

2017-07-01

The aim of this paper is to explain why the Brazilian legal system does not accept commercialization or commodification of human body parts, including genes or cells. As a consequence, in Brazil, the donation of human body parts for research-including basic or translational-must be made altruistically. For the same reason, the Brazilian patent system cannot be applied to human parts, cells or genes. Here, we present a qualitative analysis of juridical, bioethical, and social reasoning related to the legal status of human body parts especially in biobanks, as well as a description of the Brazilian legal system for clarification. Our aim is to discuss the responsibility of researchers for making available the scientific information resulting from scientific research and biobank storage of human body parts and to ensure the free utilization of knowledge in human health research.

Modelling Mathematical Argumentation: The Importance of Qualification

Science.gov (United States)

Inglis, Matthew; Mejia-Ramos, Juan; Simpson, Adrian

2007-01-01

In recent years several mathematics education researchers have attempted to analyse students' arguments using a restricted form of Toulmina's ["The Uses of Argument," Cambridge University Press, UK, 1958] argumentation scheme. In this paper we report data from task-based interviews conducted with highly talented postgraduate mathematics students,…

Toulmin's argument pattern as a "horizon of possibilities" in the study of argumentation in science education

Science.gov (United States)

Erduran, Sibel

2018-01-01

Kim and Roth (this issue) purport to draw on the social-psychological theory of L. S. Vygotsky in order to investigate social relations in children's argumentation in science topics. The authors argue that the argumentation framework offered by Stephen Toulmin is limited in addressing social relations. The authors thus criticize Toulmin's Argument Pattern (TAP) as an analytical tool and propose to investigate the genesis of evidence-related practices (especially burden of proof) in second- and third-grade children by studying dialogical interactions. In this paper, I illustrate how Toulmin's framework can contribute to (a) the study of "social relations", and (b) provide an example utilizing a theoretical framework on social relations, namely Engeström's Activity Theory framework, and (c) describe how we have used the Activity Theory along with TAP in order to understand the development of argumentation in the practices of science educators. Overall, I will argue that TAP is not inherently incapable of addressing social relational aspects of argumentation in science education but rather that science education researchers can transform theoretical tools such as Toulmin's framework intended for other purposes for use in science education research.

IELTS ACADEMIC READING ACHIEVEMENT: THE CONTRIBUTION OF INFERENCE-MAKING AND EVALUATION OF ARGUMENTS

OpenAIRE

Afsaneh Ghanizadeh; Azam Vahidian Pour; Akram Hosseini

2017-01-01

The pivotal undertaking of education today is to endow individuals with the capacity to be able to think flexibly, reason rationally, and have open minds to be able to evaluate and interpret situations. In line with the studies demonstrating the positive relationship between higher-order thinking skills and academic achievement, this study aimed to particularly examine the impact of the two subcomponents of critical thinking, i.e., inference-making and evaluation of arguments on academic IELT...

Een Scotistisch argument voor dualisme

NARCIS (Netherlands)

de Ridder, G.J.; van Woudenberg, R.

2010-01-01

In his recent book Waar geest is, is vrijheid [Where there is mind, there is freedom], Guus Labooy sets forth an original and intriguing argument, inspired by the work of John Duns Scotus, for substance dualism in the philosophy of mind. In this paper we argue that his argument, although worthy of

Legal positions of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine: main signs and definition

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Romana Reva

2016-04-01

Full Text Available The practice of a single body of constitutional jurisdiction indicates on the necessity of a certain number of amendments to the current Law of Ukraine “On the Constitutional Court of Ukraine”. It is impossible to achieve the quality regulation of these issues without a thorough scientific analysis of basic features of the legal positions of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine. The purpose of the article is to analyze the legal positions of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine and scientific views on their signs, to identify and describe the main features of the legal positions of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine. There are the conclusions made that an important step in any legal position research is the establishment of the legal nature. The article discusses different scientific views on the basic features of the legal positions of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine. On the basis of the analysis of acts of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine and scientific works, there are defined, in particular, the following main features of the legal positions of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine: they are the result of interpretation and represent the most generalized, concentrated expression of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine understanding of the provisions of the Constitution of Ukraine, laws and/ or other regulations, which are carried out within the jurisdiction of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine; they are the basis for the final decision, which is set in the act of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine; they appear in the reasoning and/ or the operative parts of the decisions and conclusions and some rulings; they have a special legal force; they are obligatory, that are binding throughout the territory of Ukraine for all public authorities, local governments, enterprises, institutions and organizations, officials, citizens and their associations; suitable for further repeated use in solving similar cases; as opposed to the decisions of

That’s No Argument! The Ultimate Criticism?

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Krabbe, Erik C. W.; van Laar, Jan Albert; Garssen, Bart J.; Godden, David; Mitchell, Gordon; Snoeck Henkemans, A. Francisca

What if in discussion the critic refuses to recognize an emotionally expressed (alleged) argument of her interlocutor as an argument? In this paper, we shall deal with this reproach, which taken literally amounts to a charge of having committed a fallacy of non-argumentation. As such it is a very

The privatization of electricity distribution in Turkey: A legal and economic analysis

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Ulusoy, Ali; Oguz, Fuat

2007-01-01

This paper analyzes the recent regulatory reform in the Turkish Electricity Distribution Market from a legal and economic perspective. We highlight tensions between the judiciary, politicians and bureaucracy and discuss their economic consequences. The paper engages in a discussion of economic consequences of legal procedures. We stress interactions between legal decisions and economic institutions. The historical positions of the Constitutional Court and Danistay (Council of State), on privatizations have been ambivalent and it is hard to qualify them as an incentive for privatization and reform, despite some recent liberal decisions. We address reasons behind their decisions and offer some suggestions toward improving the privatization process

Arguments for and against a career in surgery: a qualitative analysis.

Science.gov (United States)

Businger, Adrian; Villiger, Peter; Sommer, Christoph; Furrer, Markus

2010-08-01

To evaluate arguments given by board-certified surgeons in Switzerland for and against a career in surgery. Currently, the surgical profession in most Western countries is experiencing a labor shortage because of a declining interest in a surgical career among new graduates, a changed public opinion of medicine and its representatives, and as a consequence of the increasing influence of health economists and politicians on the professional independence of surgeons. Reports that focus primarily on the reasons that board-certified surgeons remain within the surgical profession are rare. Surgeons were asked to answer 2 questions concerning arguments for and against a career in surgery. Of 749 surgeons the arguments of 334 (44.6%) were analyzed using Mayring's content analysis. The surgeons were also asked whether they would choose medicine as a career path again. The 334 participating surgeons provided 790 statements for and 981 statements against a career in surgery. Fifty-nine surgeons (17.7%) would not choose medicine as a career again. Mayring's content analysis of the statements yielded 10 categories with arguments both for and against a career in surgery. "Personal Experience in Daily Professional Life" (18.7%) was the top-ranked category in favor of a career in surgery, and "Specific Training Conditions" (20%) was the top-ranked category against the choice of such a career. Ordinal logistic regression showed that the category "Personal Experience in Daily Professional Life" (OR, 2.39; 95%CI, 1.13-5.07) was independently associated with again studying medicine, and the category "Work-life Balance" (OR, 0.37; 95%CI, 0.20-0.70) was associated with not studying medicine again. This qualitative study revealed unfavorable working conditions and regulations as surgeons' main complaints. It is concluded that new organizational frameworks and professional perspectives are required to retain qualified and motivated surgeons in the surgical profession.

Legal liability and claims for the hotel industry

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Dimcho Todorov

2017-10-01

Full Text Available The paper presents a review of various aspects of legal liability and claims to hotel management arising in the hotel industry in the context of the legal framework and possible legal consequences for hotels and other types of commercial accommodation establishments. The main reasons for accidents' occurrence in the hotel industry are chronologically traced. Possible claims to the hotel management are also presented in detail. The problem with workplace discrimination, which is considered as unrightfully actions from administration towards hospitably industry personnel and the connected consequences, is discussed. A definition is given of the various forms of discrimination and the obligations of management to provide a healthy work environment without problems for the personnel are stated, as well. Regulative measures and documents are also presented, regarding measures following possible labour law violations. Conclusions and recommendations are formulated and ways to prevent and overcome problems and accidents in various accommodation establishments and the hotel industry as a whole are shown

Incorporating Argumentation through Forensic Science

Science.gov (United States)

Wheeler, Lindsay B.; Maeng, Jennifer L.; Smetana, Lara K.

2014-01-01

This article outlines how to incorporate argumentation into a forensic science unit using a mock trial. Practical details of the mock trial include: (1) a method of scaffolding students' development of their argument for the trial, (2) a clearly outlined set of expectations for students during the planning and implementation of the mock…

[Legal medicine specialists within the framework of acute care : Analysis of legal medicine consultations in relation to the victims' statistics of the state office of criminal investigation in Saxony-Anhalt].

Science.gov (United States)

Pliske, G; Heide, S; Lucas, B; Brandstädter, K; Walcher, F; Kropf, S; Lessig, R; Piatek, S

2018-05-01

In acute medical care, there are patients who have been injured by the influence of others. The aim of this study was to analyze all cases which were presented to the Institute for Legal Medicine of the University Halle (Saale). The cases where analyzed in relation to the victims' statistics of the state office of criminal investigation in Saxony-Anhalt. The consultations of the Institute for Legal Medicine Halle-Wittenberg for 2012-2015 were evaluated with regard to the age and gender distribution, the reasons for the consultation and time until the request for consultations. These cases were statistically compared to the victims' statistics of the state office of criminal investigation in Saxony-Anhalt 2014-2015. A total of 536 cases (55.6% male and 44.4% female patients) were evaluated. In all, 62.1% of patients were under 18 years of age; 43.5% of all consultations were requested by pediatric (surgery) clinics. The most common reasons for consultation were sexual child abuse or violence against children (50.7%). Compared to the victims' statistics, significantly more children were examined by legal medicine specialists than could have been expected (p legal medicine specialists in relation to the victims' statistics. Most of them were children and women. The temporal latency between the act of violence and the consultations was one day and more. The latency and the renunciation of the consultation of the legal medicine specialists can lead to loss of evidence.

Supporting middle school students' construction of evidence-based arguments: Impact of and student interactions with computer-based argumentation scaffolds

Science.gov (United States)

Belland, Brian Robert

Middle school students have difficulty creating evidence-based arguments (EBAs) during problem-based learning (PBL) units due to challenges (a) adequately representing the unit's central problem (Ge & Land, 2004; Liu & Bera, 2005), (b) determining and obtaining the most relevant evidence (Pedersen & Liu, 2002-2003), and (c) synthesizing gathered information to construct a sound argument (Cho & Jonassen, 2002). I designed and developed the Connection Log to support middle school students in this process. This study addressed (1) the Connection Log's impact on (a) argument evaluation ability, and (b) group argument quality and (2) how and why middle school science students used the Connection Log. Four sections of a 7th-grade science class participated. Student groups selected a stakeholder position related to the Human Genome Project (HGP) and needed to decide on and promote a plan to use $3 million to further their position as pertains to the HGP. I randomly assigned one higher-achieving and one lower-achieving class to Connection Log or no Connection Log conditions. Students completed an argument evaluation test, and impact on argument evaluation ability was determined using nested ANOVA. Two graduate students, blind to treatment conditions, rated group arguments, and impact on group argument quality was determined using nested MANOVA. To determine how and why students used the Connection Log, I videotaped and interviewed one small group from each class in the experimental condition. I coded transcripts and generated themes, triangulating the two data sources with informal observations during all class sessions and what students wrote in the Connection Log. I detected no significant differences on claim, evidence, or connection of claim to evidence ratings of debate performances. However, students used the Connection Log to counter different difficulties, and I found a significant main effect of the Connection Log on argument evaluation ability, as well as a

Effects of Instruction in Methodological Reasoning on Information Evaluation.

Science.gov (United States)

Leshowitz, Barry; DiCerbo, Kristen Eignor; Okun, Morris A.

2002-01-01

Describes an instructional program focusing on the application of causal reasoning and related principles of the scientific method to problems that occur in daily life. Reports the results of a capstone exercise that investigated the changes in students' beliefs towards legalization of marijuana after reading persuasive communications. (CMK)

Another argument against fundamental scalars

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Joglekar, S.D.

1990-01-01

An argument, perhaps not as strong, which is based on the inclusion of interaction with external gravity into a theory describing strong, electromagnetic and weak interactions is presented. The argument is related to the basis of the common belief which favours a renormalizable action against a non-renormalizable action as a candidate for a fundamental theory. (author). 12 refs

Legal regime of communal waste disposal

OpenAIRE

Záruba, Lukáš

2009-01-01

Legal regulation of Municipal Waste Management The purpose of my thesis is to analyse the national legislative frameworks on municipal waste management. The reason for my research is based on the fact that waste volumes are growing, driven by changing production and consumption patterns. As confirmed in the Sixth Environment Action Programme, waste management is one of the key priorities of EU environmental policy and the framework in this area has been progressively put in place since 1970s....

Two Forms of Philosophical Argument or Critique

Science.gov (United States)

Marshall, James D.

2004-01-01

In this paper the author looks at two forms of philosophical argument or critique. These are derived by himself from the work of the late Kantian scholar, Stephan Korner who, in his book "What is Philosophy?" (1969), draws a number of distinctions between different forms of "philosophical" argument or critique. The two forms of derived argument,…

Sources of Legal Nihilism in the Sense of Justice of the Population of Russia

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Natalia A. Nazariva

2015-12-01

Full Text Available This article is focused on the consideration of reasons and sources of an origin of legal nihilism as forms of the deformed sense of justice of citizens in Russia. By means of use of a deductive method the understanding of the term "legal nihilism" is formed. In article approaches to understanding of legal nihilism by the analysis of comparison of various positions of the leading philosophers are considered. Article considers development of sense of justice of the population against the historical processes happening in Russia throughout centuries. Relationships of cause and effect of formation and development of legal nihilism as reactions to social changes of society come to light.

The War in Afghanistan: A Legal Analysis

Science.gov (United States)

2009-01-01

parts of the legal environment. Al Qaeda’ s agents and franchisees often operate across political boundaries and may be independent of or have only...with illicit drug money and benefitting from either indifferent or actively sympathetic elements in some contiguous States, rein- forced its control...occupation forces failed in their attempts to pacify the country. A major reason for this failure was that the mujahedin benefitted from US weapons and

Limitation for the Agricultural Uses of the Rural Properties Represented by LFR (Legal Forest Reserves

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Carlos Cesar Ronquim

2015-12-01

Full Text Available The present text approaches the limitations of special protection of natural resources in the agricultural properties represented by Legal Forest Reserves (LFR, from their origin to the form they are being tutored now. Their relationships and differentiations are established. Forms for the recompositions and use of LFR are approached. Finally, the arguments of the environmentalists and ruralists are pointed out for the improvement of the institute and its applicability, presenting forms of putting in practice the desirable sustainable development

A longitudinal simulation-based ethical-legal curriculum for otolaryngology residents.

Science.gov (United States)

Fanous, Amanda; Rappaport, Jamie; Young, Meredith; Park, Yoon Soo; Manoukian, John; Nguyen, Lily H P

2017-11-01

To develop, implement, and evaluate a longitudinal, simulation-based ethics and legal curriculum designed specifically for otolaryngology residents. Otolaryngology residents were recruited to participate in a yearly half-day ethical-legal module, the curriculum of which spanned 4 years. Each module included: three simulated scenarios, small-group multisource feedback, and large-group debriefings. Scenarios involved encounters with standardized patients. Residents' ethical-legal knowledge was assessed pre- and postmodule with multiple-choice questions, and ethical reasoning was assessed by a variety of evaluators during the simulated scenario using a locally developed assessment tool. Participants completed an exit survey at the end of each module. Eighteen residents completed four modules from the academic years of 2008 to 2009 to 2011 to 2012. The first year was considered a pilot module, and data were collected for the following 3 years. Knowledge of legal issues improved significantly among residents (mean at pre = 3.40 and post = 4.60, P otolaryngology-head and neck surgery residents. This educational program resulted in a both objective and subjective improvement in legal and ethics knowledge and skills. NA. Laryngoscope, 127:2501-2509, 2017. © 2017 The American Laryngological, Rhinological and Otological Society, Inc.

Monitoring and Surveillance in the Workplace: Lessons Learnt? – Investigating the International Legal Position

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Verine Etsebeth

2007-06-01

Full Text Available When considering the legal implications of monitoring and surveillance in the workplace, the question may be asked why companies deploy computer surveillance and monitoring in the first place. Several reasons may be put forward to justify why more than 80% of all major American firms monitor employee e-mails and Internet usage. However, what most companies forget is the fact that the absence or presence of monitoring and surveillance activities in a company holds serious legal consequences for companies. From the discussion in this paper it will become apparent that there is a vast difference in how most countries approach this subject matter. On the one hand America does not afford any employee a reasonable expectation of privacy when it comes to the use of corporate computer resources and systems, while in contrast to this position the United Kingdom goes out of its way to protect each employee’s reasonable expectation of privacy. This paper will not only investigate the different approaches followed by some of the world-leader, but will also investigate the legal consequences embedded in each approach. This paper will ultimately enable the reader to judge for himself/herself which approach his/her country should follow while being fully informed of the legal consequences attached to the chosen approach.

Non-clinicians' judgments about asylum seekers' mental health: how do legal representatives of asylum seekers decide when to request medico-legal reports?

Science.gov (United States)

Wilson-Shaw, Lucy; Pistrang, Nancy; Herlihy, Jane

2012-01-01

Procedures for determining refugee status across Europe are being speeded up, despite the high prevalence of mental health difficulties among asylum seekers. An assurance given is that ''vulnerable applicants'' will be identified and excluded from accelerated procedures. Although experts have recommended assessments to be undertaken by experienced clinicians, this is unlikely to happen for political and financial reasons. Understanding how non-clinically qualified personnel perform assessments of mental health issues is timely and crucial. Misrecognition of refugees due to the inappropriate use of accelerated procedures involves the risk of returning the very people who have the right to protection from further persecution. To examine the decision making of immigration lawyers, who are an example of a group of nonclinicians who decide when and whether to refer asylum-seekers for psychiatric assessment. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 12 legal representatives working with people seeking refugee or human rights protection in the United Kingdom. The resultant material was analysed using Framework Analysis. Themes clustered around the legal case, the client, the representative and the systems, all with sub-themes. A mapping exercise integrated these themes to show how representatives brought together questions of (1) evidential reasons for a report, influenced by their legal, psychological and case law knowledge, and (2) perceived evidence of mental distress, influenced by professional and personal experiences and expectations. The legal representatives interviewed were well-informed and trained in psychological issues as well as clearly dedicated to their clients. This helped them to attempt quasi-diagnoses of common mental health problems. They nonetheless demonstrated stereotypical understanding of post-traumatic stress disorder and other possible diagnoses and the role of subjectivity. The study has implications for other groups - particularly those

Non-clinicians’ judgments about asylum seekers’ mental health: how do legal representatives of asylum seekers decide when to request medico-legal reports?

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Lucy Wilson-Shaw

2012-10-01

Full Text Available Background : Procedures for determining refugee status across Europe are being speeded up, despite the high prevalence of mental health difficulties among asylum seekers. An assurance given is that ‘‘vulnerable applicants’’ will be identified and excluded from accelerated procedures. Although experts have recommended assessments to be undertaken by experienced clinicians, this is unlikely to happen for political and financial reasons. Understanding how non-clinically qualified personnel perform assessments of mental health issues is timely and crucial. Misrecognition of refugees due to the inappropriate use of accelerated procedures involves the risk of returning the very people who have the right to protection from further persecution. Objective : To examine the decision making of immigration lawyers, who are an example of a group of nonclinicians who decide when and whether to refer asylum-seekers for psychiatric assessment. Method : Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 12 legal representatives working with people seeking refugee or human rights protection in the United Kingdom. The resultant material was analysed using Framework Analysis. Results : Themes clustered around the legal case, the client, the representative and the systems, all with sub-themes. A mapping exercise integrated these themes to show how representatives brought together questions of (1 evidential reasons for a report, influenced by their legal, psychological and case law knowledge, and (2 perceived evidence of mental distress, influenced by professional and personal experiences and expectations. Conclusions : The legal representatives interviewed were well-informed and trained in psychological issues as well as clearly dedicated to their clients. This helped them to attempt quasi-diagnoses of common mental health problems. They nonetheless demonstrated stereotypical understanding of post-traumatic stress disorder and other possible diagnoses and the

Evaluating arguments during instigations of defence motivation and accuracy motivation.