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.

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.

Fallacious Argumentation in Student Reasoning: Are There Benefits?

Science.gov (United States)

Mueller, Mary; Yankelewitz, Dina

2014-01-01

This article reports on an analysis of episodes of invalid or controversial arguments that occurred while two different groups of students worked on similar fraction tasks and examine the role that these types of arguments played in the development of students' reasoning. One group consisted of suburban, middle-class, fourth graders who worked on…

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

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...

Support for argument structures review and assessment

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Cyra, Lukasz; Gorski, Janusz

2011-01-01

Argument structures are commonly used to develop and present cases for safety, security and for other properties of systems. Such structures tend to grow excessively, which causes problems with their review and assessment. Two issues are of particular interest: (1) systematic and explicit assessment of the compelling power of an argument, and (2) communication of the result of such an assessment to relevant recipients. The paper presents a solution to these problems. The method of Visual Assessment of Arguments (VAA), being this solution, is based on the Dempster-Shafer theory of evidence applied to the assessment of the strength of arguments, and a visual mechanism of issuing and presenting assessments, supported by the so-called opinion triangle. In the paper we explain theoretical grounding for the method and provide guidance on its application. The results of some validation experiments are also presented.

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...

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.

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...

Enunciation and argumentation: proposals for the analysis of personal forms as argumentative resources in orality

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Federico Testoni

2017-02-01

Full Text Available As part of an investigation about strategies and resources for the construction of social representations (Raiter, 2016 on orality, we propose to articulate an analysis of linguistic forms with the argumentative dimension of utterances. The aim of this paper is to review the methodology proposed by Lavandera (1984 for the analysis of the tension between the personal and the impersonal, interpreting the use of this dimension as an argumentative resource (Ducrot, 1984. From our interdiscursive perspective, we seek to show how the characterization of the enunciative roles can facilitate analysis of the positions of enunciation from which the meaning of statements is oriented (Guimarães, 1998. To this end, we will analyse three fragments of an interview by applying the study of the distribution of pronominal forms (Lavandera, 1984 and the argumentative chains (Ducrot, 1984. We believe that analysis as described from the perspective of discourse analysis will mean a contribution for future work on strategies for building social representations.

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

Full Text Available Historical evidences suggest that human beings have been always in search of God in some form. Some believe that man is born with this divine sense. This ubiquitous quality of human beings is called primordial nature (fitrah. Many scholars have tried to demonstrate the existence of God through this shared quality of human individuals. In Islamic thought this latter intellectual effort has been designated as "argument from primordial nature" and in western theological and philosophical thought it is known as "argument from general consensus". Although these arguments have some differences in their general settings and attitudes; but they both resort to human general divine attitude to demonstrate the existence of God. In this essay we have sought to propound the views of those scholars who have dealt with this argument at length. Reflecting on the general form of the expositions shows that the expositions of argument from primordial nature and argument from general consensus cannot demonstrate the existence of God without basing themselves on the principle of causation or human existential poverty. Via comparative assessment of these two arguments we have turned to the critiques which have been leveled against them and laid bare their similarities and differences. Of course there are some differences between the argument from primordial nature in Islam and the argument from general consensus in west. This essay seeks to assay the key expositions which have been offered of these arguments in Islamic and western philosophies. It seems that among Moslem philosophers, Mulla Sadra from the early generation, Allameh Tabtabaei, Imam Khomeini, Jawadi Amuli and Mutahari from later generation, have paid more attention to this argument. Among western scholars one can mention William James, Charles Hodge, James Joyce, Paul Tillich and Seneca who have made more direct remarks on this argument. John Locke is also against this argument. This is why we have

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.

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

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

Vortex forcing model for turbulent flow over spanwise-heterogeneous topogrpahies: scaling arguments and similarity solution

Science.gov (United States)

Anderson, William; Yang, Jianzhi

2017-11-01

Spanwise surface heterogeneity beneath high-Reynolds number, fully-rough wall turbulence is known to induce mean secondary flows in the form of counter-rotating streamwise vortices. The secondary flows are a manifestation of Prandtl's secondary flow of the second kind - driven and sustained by spatial heterogeneity of components of the turbulent (Reynolds averaged) stress tensor. The spacing between adjacent surface heterogeneities serves as a control on the spatial extent of the counter-rotating cells, while their intensity is controlled by the spanwise gradient in imposed drag (where larger gradients associated with more dramatic transitions in roughness induce stronger cells). In this work, we have performed an order of magnitude analysis of the mean (Reynolds averaged) streamwise vorticity transport equation, revealing the scaling dependence of circulation upon spanwise spacing. The scaling arguments are supported by simulation data. Then, we demonstrate that mean streamwise velocity can be predicted a priori via a similarity solution to the mean streamwise vorticity transport equation. A vortex forcing term was used to represent the affects of spanwise topographic heterogeneity within the flow. Efficacy of the vortex forcing term was established with large-eddy simulation cases, wherein vortex forcing model parameters were altered to capture different values of spanwise spacing.

Legal argumentation and judicial decision making: Empirical evidence from Ecuador

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

José Luis Castro-Montero

2018-05-01

Full Text Available Legal scholars often analyze argumentation from a formal perspective, mostly applied to judicial decision making. This article presents an alternative approach, as it empirically evaluates the quality of petitioners’ legal argumentation within the context of abstract constitutional review proceedings. The quality of legal argumentation is herein defined as the ability of the petitioner to (i identify the challenged norm and the potentially infringed constitutional norm, (ii present clear and coherent arguments, and (iii justify its arguments upon legal sources, such as jurisprudential precedents or legal doctrine. Original data on forty lawsuits presented before the Ecuadorian Constitutional Court between 2008 and 2016 is used to test whether legal argumentation determines the outcome of a decision. A novel measure of the overall quality of argumentation and strength of cases brought before the Ecuadorian Constitutional Court by both public and private parties is also developed in the form of an expert survey. The main findings suggest that plaintiffs’ legal argumentation quality does not determine the outcome of the final decision of the Ecuadorian Constitutional Court, but rather the type of plaintiff (public or private does.

Explanation can cause Forgetting: Memory Dynamics in the Generation of New Arguments.

Science.gov (United States)

Soares, Julia S; Storm, Benjamin C

2017-10-01

Retrieval-induced forgetting is observed when the retrieval of target information causes the forgetting of nontarget information. The present study investigated whether similar dynamics occur in the context of generating arguments in the process of explanation. Participants studied arguments associated with several issues before attempting to think of new arguments pertaining to a subset of those issues. When given a later memory test, participants were less likely to recall the studied arguments if they had attempted to think of new arguments than if they had not. This argument-induced forgetting effect was observed regardless of whether participants attempted to generate arguments that either agreed or disagreed with the position of the arguments they studied. The effect was significantly reduced, however, and even numerically reversed, when participants generated arguments that were highly related to the studied arguments. This finding fits well with previous research on retrieval-induced forgetting, which has shown that the retrieval or generation of new information fails to cause the forgetting of old information when the two types of information are well integrated or semantically associated.

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…

Argumentation Within Language as Subsidy for the Evaluation of Reading Practices and Production of Argumentative Texts

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Lauro Gomes

2016-12-01

Full Text Available This paper aims to present an evaluation proposal of the performance in reading and writing dissertative-argumentative texts, based on principles and concepts from the theory of Argumentation in Language – created by Jean-Claude Anscombre and Oswald Ducrot, especially the version of the Theory of the Semantic Blocks and the works inspired by it. The goal is to create criteria which are capable of being less intuitive in judging the performance in reading and wrinting dissertative-argumentative texts. The analysis of the corpora – the Enem 2011’s composition proposal and 50 (fifty texts written by the students – and the test of the criteria of reading and writing evaluation in this work revealed practice funcionality and efficiency of criteria. The results allow these criteria to be applied in any evaluation processes of dissertative-argumenative texts. Finally, this paper offers theoretical and methodological subisdies which can help teachers and professors to qualify their teaching of reading and writing and the evaluation of student’s texts.

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

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.…

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.

Theoretical Proposal for Pragmatic-Rhetorical Analysis of Argument in the Tourist Guide

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

MSc. Iliana Rosabal-Pérez

2015-10-01

Full Text Available The purpose of the article is to present a useful theoretical proposal for the analysis of argumentation within the guidebook genre. The study perspective is supported on the rhetorical-pragmatic perspective of argumentation provided by some authors as well as the theoretical models applied to the study of persuasion in guidebooks suggested by Adam/Bonhomme (1997, Hernández-Santaolalla and Cobo-Durán (2010. The analysis of argumentation in this kind of text must consider a tactical and strategic view of  the rhetorical actions; that is to say, not to abstain from the elocution traditional examination since argumentation is an essential devise obtainable in the whole test. Keywords: rhetorical, argumentation, guidebook, rhetorical operations, topical.

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”.

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…

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…

Using the Debate Method for Teaching Argumentation to 10-12 Year-Old Children

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Y. V. Rybka

2012-01-01

Full Text Available The paper is devoted to peculiarities of using the debate method in teaching argumentation to 10–12 year-old children. The research is aimed at identifying the most effective ways and means of applying the given method. According to the author’s hypothesis, regular integration of discussions into the training course of rhetoric should promote learners’ argumentation, changing it from a mere fantasy through egocentric attitudes to the objective position expressed in a conclusive argumentative way. To achieve the research objectives, the experimental training method was developed applying the debate technique in the form of role plays adapted to peculiarities of children’s age. The experimental results indicated the decentration dynamics in the training process and, therefore, the effectiveness of the experimental training course. The presented training program can be used in teaching rhetoric to 10–12 year- olds, as well as in the optional argumentation course based on the debate technique. In addition, the analysis of children’s argumentation position in the context of socio-cognitive approach can give an impetus for further studies of children’s speech and thinking. 

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...

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 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

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…

Quine's Double Standard: Undermining the Indispensability Argument via the Indeterminacy of Reference

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Otávio Bueno

2003-12-01

Full Text Available Quine has famously put forward the indispensability argument to force belief in the existence of mathematical objects (such as classes due to their indispensability to our best theories of the world (Quine 1960. Quine has also advocated the indeterminacy of reference argument, according to which reference is dramatically indeterminate: given a language, there’s no unique reference relation for that language (see Quine 1969a. In this paper, I argue that these two arguments are in conflict with each other. Whereas the indispensability argument supports realism about mathematics, the indeterminacy of reference argument, when applied to mathematics, provides a powerful strategy in support of mathematical anti-realism. I conclude the paper by indicating why the indeterminacy of reference phenomenon should be preferred over the considerations regarding indispensability. In the end, even the Quinean shouldn’t be a realist (platonist about mathematics.

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)

The acceptability of arguments in favour of and against the Iraq War

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Juan LaLlave

2005-10-01

probability that these factors were significant and valid. We performed tests for Covariance Parameter Estimates for Hierarchical Linear Models proposed by Bryk & Raudenbush (1992 with estimation of Maximum Likelihood (ML, by applying the equation (1 - model covariance/intercept covariance. Applying the standard criteria by Cohen & Cohen (1983, we consider a model as relevant, if it accounts for more than 10% of the proportion reduction in error (PRE. Mixed linear model tests identified relevant predictors with chi square significance of p < .001. Design factors, which were relevant included: "Was the argument realistic? Did it evoke constructive feelings? Did argument details offer beneficent considerations?".

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.

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...

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...

Perceptions of the Nature and 'Goodness' of Argument among College Students, Science Teachers, and Scientists

Science.gov (United States)

Abi-El-Mona, Issam; Abd-El-Khalick, Fouad

2011-03-01

This study aimed to elucidate college freshmen science students, secondary science teachers, and scientists' perceptions of 'scientific' argument; to compare participants' perceptions with Stephen Toulmin's analytical framework of argument; and to characterize the criteria that participants deployed when assessing the 'quality' or 'goodness' of arguments. Thirty students, teachers, and scientists-with 10 members in each group-participated in two semi-structured individual interviews. During the first interview, participants generated an argument in response to a socioscientific issue. In the second interview, each participant 'evaluated' three arguments generated by a member from each participant group without being privy to the arguer's group membership. Interview transcripts were qualitatively analyzed. The findings point to both similarities and differences between participants' conceptions of argument and those based on Toulmin's analytical framework. Participants used an array of common and idiosyncratic criteria to judge the quality or goodness of argument. Finally, contrary to expectations, participants independently agreed that the 'best' arguments were those generated by participant science teachers.

The use of analogy in pro-life argumentation

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Simona Mazilu

2012-11-01

Full Text Available The paper is concerned with how analogy is strategically used in pro-life argumentation on abortion. Pragma-dialectics (van Eemeren and Grootendorst 1992 offers a set of critical questions by means of which I will evaluate the use of the argumentation based on a relation of analogy in terms of dialectical soundness. Examining various pro-life texts, I have noticed that the analogies employed remain unexplained. Therefore, despite the apparent similarities between abortion and the German holocaust or slavery, for instance, there are essential differences which are not mentioned. I claim that these analogies mainly have a rhetorical function, to operate what has been called by Micheli (2007: 960 “a transfer of emotional consensus”.

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.

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)

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.

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...

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)

Arguments against nuclear engineering

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Hahn, L.

1991-01-01

The arguments put forward are: data from risk studies concerning the frequency of occurrence of core meltdown in LWR type reactors, the frequency of containment failures and resulting off-site emissions, in-plant accident management, and the hazard of hydrogen explosions. Yet unresolved problems are stated to be: the presentation of results of the German Risk Study (part DRS-B), the way accident management is dealt with, the evaluation standards applied to safety deficits, the hydrogen problem, the biological effects of low-dose radiation, the qualification of radwaste repositories, the information policy of public authorities, and the regime of governmental control and supervision. (HP) [de

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…

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.

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.

Building Financial Peace: A Conflict Resolution Framework for Money Arguments

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Sarah D Asebedo

2016-12-01

Full Text Available This paper presents a well-known and highly utilized conflict resolution framework from the mediation profession and demonstrates how to apply this framework to money arguments. While conflict resolution skills have been identified as important to communication within the financial planning context, an integrated conflict resolution framework has yet to be recognized and understood within the financial planning literature. This paper aims to fill this gap. Ultimately, both mental health professionals and financial planners can benefit from an interdisciplinary approach to resolving money arguments by combining training in personal financial strategies and conflict resolution principles.

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.

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.

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,…

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.…

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.

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.'

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

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.

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.

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’.

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. 

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.

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...

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 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 contemporary approach to validity arguments: a practical guide to Kane's framework.

Science.gov (United States)

Cook, David A; Brydges, Ryan; Ginsburg, Shiphra; Hatala, Rose

2015-06-01

Assessment is central to medical education and the validation of assessments is vital to their use. Earlier validity frameworks suffer from a multiplicity of types of validity or failure to prioritise among sources of validity evidence. Kane's framework addresses both concerns by emphasising key inferences as the assessment progresses from a single observation to a final decision. Evidence evaluating these inferences is planned and presented as a validity argument. We aim to offer a practical introduction to the key concepts of Kane's framework that educators will find accessible and applicable to a wide range of assessment tools and activities. All assessments are ultimately intended to facilitate a defensible decision about the person being assessed. Validation is the process of collecting and interpreting evidence to support that decision. Rigorous validation involves articulating the claims and assumptions associated with the proposed decision (the interpretation/use argument), empirically testing these assumptions, and organising evidence into a coherent validity argument. Kane identifies four inferences in the validity argument: Scoring (translating an observation into one or more scores); Generalisation (using the score[s] as a reflection of performance in a test setting); Extrapolation (using the score[s] as a reflection of real-world performance), and Implications (applying the score[s] to inform a decision or action). Evidence should be collected to support each of these inferences and should focus on the most questionable assumptions in the chain of inference. Key assumptions (and needed evidence) vary depending on the assessment's intended use or associated decision. Kane's framework applies to quantitative and qualitative assessments, and to individual tests and programmes of assessment. Validation focuses on evaluating the key claims, assumptions and inferences that link assessment scores with their intended interpretations and uses. The Implications

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 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 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

Argumentation, rationality, and psychology of reasoning

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

David Godden

2015-05-01

Full Text Available This paper explicates an account of argumentative rationality by articulating the common, basic idea of its nature, and then identifying a collection of assumptions inherent in it. Argumentative rationality is then contrasted with dual-process theories of reasoning and rationality prevalent in the psychology of reasoning. It is argued that argumentative rationality properly corresponds only with system-2 reasoning in dual-process theories. This result challenges the prescriptive force of argumentative norms derives if they derive at all from their descriptive accuracy of our cognitive capacities. In response, I propose an activity-based account of reasoning which retains the assumptions of argumentative rationality while recontextualizing the relationship between reasoning as a justificatory activity and the psychological states and processes underlying that activity.

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…

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.

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.

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…

Brand “NIKE”, its signs and arguments: a study of applied semiotic

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Vinícius dos Santos Souza

2016-05-01

Full Text Available This study elected as its research object the logo of the call sporting products company Nike; as regards to the Greek goodness Nice: diva of the victory. Based on Peirce's semiotics, our aim to identify and understand the perceptive and historical foundations responsible for sustaining the said logo as a sign capable of representing the company in their business purposes. We aim to demonstrate that the selection of logo for the company's founders follows a line of argument focused on building of semiotic links - perceptive and historical - between the brand, its products and the behavior of their consumers. The logo implies a dedicated language for the possibility of a communicative link between the product and the subjectivity of its consumer; so that the first former becomes logically part of thoughts and behaviors of the second.

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.

EXTROVERT PERSONALITY AND ITS IMPACT ON STUDENTS’ ARGUMENTATIVE ESSAY WRITING SKILL

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Wida Sopia Marwa

2016-06-01

Full Text Available This research aims at finding the positive correlation between extroversion personality and students’ argumentative essay writing skill. The objective of this research is to know the correlation between extroversion personality and students’ argumentative essay of sophomore English Department students in University of Kuningan. The population in this research was all sophomore English Department students with total 60 students. A convenience purposive sampling was applied to get the sample students. The samples of this research were 12 extrovert students. From the results of statistical tests to test the correlation between two variables, this research used Pearson product moment. As the result of the calculation, it was found that r-observed (0,778 > t-tables (0, 532. Then, based on the hypothesis test with two tail test, the result of hypothesis test obtained t-observed (3, 917 > t-tables (1, 782. Thus, it can be concluded that Ha was accepted and there was a correlation between extroversion personality and students’ argumentative essay writing skill.

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

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.

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)

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 « ...

Similarity or dissimilarity in the relations between human service organizations.

Science.gov (United States)

Bruynooghe, Kevin; Verhaeghe, Mieke; Bracke, Piet

2008-01-01

Exchange theory and homophily theory give rise to counteracting expectations for the interaction between human service organizations. Based on arguments of exchange theory, more interaction is expected between dissimilar organizations having complementary resources. Based on arguments of homophily theory, organizations having similar characteristics are expected to interact more. Interorganizational relations between human service organizations in two regional networks in Flanders are examined in this study. Results indicate that human service organizations tend to cooperate more with similar organizations as several homophily effects but not one effect of dissimilarity were found to be significant. The results of this study contribute to the understanding of interorganizational networks of human service organizations and have implications for the development of integrated care.

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

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.

Carl Cohen's 'kind' arguments for animal rights and against human rights.

Science.gov (United States)

Nobis, Nathan

2004-01-01

Carl Cohen's arguments against animal rights are shown to be unsound. His strategy entails that animals have rights, that humans do not, the negations of those conclusions, and other false and inconsistent implications. His main premise seems to imply that one can fail all tests and assignments in a class and yet easily pass if one's peers are passing and that one can become a convicted criminal merely by setting foot in a prison. However, since his moral principles imply that nearly all exploitive uses of animals are wrong anyway, foes of animal rights are advised to seek philosophical consolations elsewhere. I note that some other philosophers' arguments are subject to similar objections.

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

'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.

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)

The use of care robots in aged care: A systematic review of argument-based ethics literature.

Science.gov (United States)

Vandemeulebroucke, Tijs; Dierckx de Casterlé, Bernadette; Gastmans, Chris

2018-01-01

As care robots become more commonplace in aged-care settings, the ethical debate on their use becomes increasingly important. Our objective was to examine the ethical arguments and underlying concepts used in the ethical debate on care robot use in aged care. We conducted a systematic literature search for argument-based ethics publications focusing on care robot use in aged-care practices. We used an innovative methodology that consisted of three steps: (a) identifying conceptual-ethical questions, (b) conducting a literature search, and (c) identifying, describing and analyzing the ethical arguments in connection with the conceptual-ethical questions. Twenty-eight appropriate publications were identified. All were published between 2002 and 2016. Four primary ethical approaches were distinguished: (a) a deontological, (b) a principlist, (c) an objective-list, and (d) a care-ethical. All approaches were equally represented across the articles, and all used similar concepts that grounded their diverse ethical arguments. A small group of publications could not be linked to an ethical approach. All included publications presented a strong ethical rationale based on fully elaborated normative arguments. Although the reviewed studies used similar grounding concepts, the studies' arguments were very diverse and sometimes diametrically opposed. Our analysis shows how one envisions care robot use in aged-care settings is influenced by how one views the traditional boundaries of the ethical landscape in aged care. We suggest that an ethical analysis of care robot use employs "democratic spaces," in which all stakeholders in aged care, especially care recipients, have a voice in the ethical debate. Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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...

Computer Supported Argument Visualisation: Modelling in Consultative Democracy Around Wicked Problems

Science.gov (United States)

Ohl, Ricky

In this case study, computer supported argument visualisation has been applied to the analysis and representation of the draft South East Queensland Regional Plan Consultation discourse, demonstrating how argument mapping can help deliver the transparency and accountability required in participatory democracy. Consultative democracy for regional planning falls into a category of problems known as “wicked problems”. Inherent in this environment is heterogeneous viewpoints, agendas and voices, built on disparate and often contradictory logic. An argument ontology and notation that was designed specifically to deal with consultative urban planning around wicked problems is the Issue Based Information System (IBIS) and IBIS notation (Rittel & Webber, 1984). The software used for argument visualisation in this case was Compendium, a derivative of IBIS. The high volume of stakeholders and discourse heterogeneity in this environment calls for a unique approach to argument mapping. The map design model developed from this research has been titled a “Consultation Map”. The design incorporates the IBIS ontology within a hybrid of mapping approaches, amalgamating elements from concept, dialogue, argument, debate, thematic and tree-mapping. The consultation maps developed from the draft South East Queensland Regional Plan Consultation provide a transparent visual record to give evidence of the themes of citizen issues within the consultation discourse. The consultation maps also link the elicited discourse themes to related policies from the SEQ Regional Plan providing explicit evidence of SEQ Regional Plan policy-decisions matching citizen concerns. The final consultation map in the series provides explicit links between SEQ Regional Plan policy items and monitoring activities reporting on the ongoing implementation of the SEQ Regional Plan. This map provides updatable evidence of and accountability for SEQ Regional Plan policy implementation and developments.

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.

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.

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.

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...

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

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.

Prerequisites for Correctness in Legal Argumentation

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...

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

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

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…

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.

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

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 ...

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

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,…

Discourse Connector Usage in Argumentative Essays by American and Thai University Students

Science.gov (United States)

Jangarun, Kamolphan; Luksaneeyanawin, Sudaporn

2016-01-01

This study investigated the similarities and differences in the use of discourse connectors (DCs) in argumentative essays of American undergraduate students (AMs), Thai with high-English exposure (THHs) and Thai with low-English exposure (THLs). The data of these three groups were collected from 60 essays; 20 essays were from the corpus of…

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

A Reassessment of George Pierce Baker's "The Principles of Argumentation": Minimizing the Use of Formal Logic in Favor of Practical Approaches

Science.gov (United States)

Bordelon, Suzanne

2006-01-01

In this article, the author demonstrated how recent histories relied primarily on previous accounts and one textbook to characterize George Pierce Baker's work. This narrow assessment of "The Principles of Argumentation" limits one's understanding of his contribution to argumentation theory and pedagogy. Similarly, one has seen the need for care…

Design Argumentation in Academic Design Education

DEFF Research Database (Denmark)

Dalsgaard, Peter; Dindler, Christian; Fritsch, Jonas

2013-01-01

We explore design argumentation as a resource when teaching interaction design in a university setting. We propose that design argumentation can help bridge between practice-based design education and theoretical issues from university curricula. In this paper, we outline the idea of design...

The Optimum Level of Argumentativeness for Employed Women.

Science.gov (United States)

Schullery, Nancy M.

1998-01-01

Examines the relationship between argumentativeness and women's supervisory level in organizations. Finds no simple relationship between supervisory level and argumentativeness for women, but indicates that moderation in argumentativeness increases with supervisory level. Notes implications for pedagogy: would-be female executives should be…

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.

Analysis and evaluation of argumentative discourse

NARCIS (Netherlands)

van Eemeren, F.H.; Garssen, B.; van Eemeren, F.H.

2015-01-01

Although Renkema’s Introduction to Discourse Studies (2004: Chap. 12) provides a useful introduction to the study of argumentation, this brief account does not provide a full characterization of the field. Among the dominant approaches to argumentative discourse a general distinction can be made

The Determinants of Money Arguments between Spouses

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Dorothy B. Durband

2010-10-01

Full Text Available A commonly held view is that arguments about money are associated with marital problems, but relatively little is known about the nature of arguing about money within marriage. Using data from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1979 (NLSY79, this study uses a collective bargaining approach to examine the role of money arguments in marriage. The sample (N = 1,371 consists of married women. A collective bargaining framework provides a context for understanding money arguments within the marital relationship. Results indicate that costly communication is the dominant predictor of money arguments, followed by level and proportion of wife’s income, and household net worth. Because results suggest that both communication and financial resources are important components to understanding money arguments within marriage, a combination of professionals trained in marital therapy and/or financial planning is required for couples interested in seeking assistance to increase their satisfaction and/or avoid divorce.

Argumentation Ethics and The Philosophy of Freedom

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Frank van Dun

2009-03-01

Full Text Available When H.-H. Hoppe claimed (in A Theory of Socialism and Capitalism, 1989 that the principles of libertarianism were argumentatively irrefutable, both the logical coherence and the relevance of his “argument from argumentation” were criticized. While occasionally some of these criticisms still crop up, this paper defends Hoppe’s claim against them from the vantage point of the author’s own work (in Dutch on the ethics of dialogue in the nineteen-seventies. It presents a more detailed and systematic presentation of the “argument from argumentation” than Hoppe had need for in the particular context of his book. It makes a distinction between arguments about principles and arguments about particular cases in which these principles may be invoked; and between the normative validity (as a matter of principle of certain presumptions and the fact that in particular cases these presumptions hold only in principle and can be refuted by the evidence pertaining to the cases.

Minors and euthanasia: a systematic review of argument-based ethics literature.

Science.gov (United States)

Cuman, Giulia; Gastmans, Chris

2017-07-01

Euthanasia was first legalised in the Netherlands in 2002, followed by similar legislation in Belgium the same year. Since the beginning, however, only the Netherlands included the possibility for minors older than 12 years to request euthanasia. In 2014, the Belgian Act legalising euthanasia was amended to include requests by minors who possess the capacity of discernment. This amendment sparked great debate, and raised difficult ethical questions about when and how a minor can be deemed competent. We conducted a systematic review of argument-based literature on euthanasia in minors. The search process followed PRISMA guidelines. Thirteen publications were included. The four-principle approach of medical ethics was used to organise the ethical arguments underlying this debate. The justification for allowing euthanasia in minors is buttressed mostly by the principles of beneficence and respect for autonomy. Somewhat paradoxically, both principles are also used in the literature to argue against the extension of legislation to minors. Opponents of euthanasia generally rely on the principle of non-maleficence. The present analysis reveals that the debate surrounding euthanasia in minors is at an early stage. In order to allow a more in-depth ethical discussion, we suggest enriching the four-principle approach by including a care-ethics approach. What is Known: • The Netherlands and Belgium are the only two countries in the world with euthanasia legislation making it possible for minors to receive euthanasia. • This legislation provoked great debate globally, with ethical arguments for and against this legislation. What is New: • A systematic description of the ethical concepts and arguments grounding the debate on euthanasia in minors, as reported in the argument-based ethics literature. • A need has been identified to enrich the debate with a care-ethics approach to avoid oversimplifying the ethical decision-making process.

Fallacies in ethical argumentation on abortion

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Simona Mazilu

2007-01-01

Full Text Available This paper represents a case study of the types of fallacies that may occur in the argumentation stage of an ethical dispute over abortion. The theoretical framework I use is the pragma-dialectical theory of argumentation (van Eemeren and Grootendorst 1992, 2004 which conceives of fallacies as violations of the rules for critical discussion. I will focus on the fallacies resulting from the violation of the relevance rule in two fragments of argumentative texts illustrating opposing positions on abortion. I claim that these fallacies function as winning strategies in the ethical dispute in case.

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…

Argumentation and indigenous knowledge: socio-historical influences in contextualizing an argumentation model in South African schools

Science.gov (United States)

Gallard Martínez, Alejandro J.

2011-09-01

This forum considers argumentation as a means of science teaching in South African schools, through the integration of indigenous knowledge (IK). It addresses issues raised in Mariana G. Hewson and Meshach B. Ogunniyi's paper entitled: Argumentation-teaching as a method to introduce indigenous knowledge into science classrooms: opportunities and challenges. As well as Peter Easton's: Hawks and baby chickens: cultivating the sources of indigenous science education; and, Femi S. Otulaja, Ann Cameron and Audrey Msimanga's: Rethinking argumentation-teaching strategies and indigenous knowledge in South African science classrooms. The first topic addressed is that implementation of argumentation in the science classroom becomes a complex endeavor when the tensions between students' IK, the educational infrastructure (allowance for teacher professional development, etc.) and local belief systems are made explicit. Secondly, western styles of debate become mitigating factors because they do not always adequately translate to South African culture. For example, in many instances it is more culturally acceptable in South Africa to build consensus than to be confrontational. Thirdly, the tension between what is "authentic science" and what is not becomes an influencing factor when a tension is created between IK and western science. Finally, I argue that the thrust of argumentation is to set students up as "scientist-students" who will be considered through a deficit model by judging their habitus and cultural capital. Explicitly, a "scientist-student" is a student who has "learned," modeled and thoroughly assimilated the habits of western scientists, evidently—and who will be judged by and held accountable for their demonstration of explicit related behaviors in the science classroom. I propose that science teaching, to include argumentation, should consist of "listening carefully" (radical listening) to students and valuing their language, culture, and learning as a model

The Impact of Argumentativeness on Resistance to Persuasion.

Science.gov (United States)

Kazoleas, Dean

1993-01-01

Examines the impact of argumentativeness on cognitive responses and attitude change of undergraduate college students. Finds that argumentative individuals generate greater numbers of counterarguments and are more resistant to persuasion. Indicates that attitude change for the highly argumentative individual is a function of both positive and…

Friendly Alternatives to the Argumentative Essay.

Science.gov (United States)

Costanzo, William V.

Many teachers would like to counter what Deborah Tannen calls "The Argument Culture." They recognize that teaching students traditional principles of argument may perpetuate the kind of adversarial thinking that erupts all too often: in aggressive newspaper headlines, on confrontational television shows, in court rooms, and in school…

Argument and Credibility Appeals in Persuasion.

Science.gov (United States)

Benoit, William L.

1987-01-01

Indicated that (1) arguments perceived as strong by receivers generated both more favorable, supportive cognitive responses and attitude change than weak message arguments; and (2) perceived source expertise and attractiveness influenced cognitive responses, but not in a coherent fashion or to the extent that they effect attitude change. (JD)

(Non-)Arguments in Long-Distance Extractions.

Science.gov (United States)

Nyvad, Anne Mette; Kizach, Johannes; Christensen, Ken Ramshøj

2015-10-01

Previous research has shown that in fully grammatical sentences, response time increases and acceptability decreases when the filler in a long-distance extraction is incompatible with the matrix verb. This effect could potentially be due to a difference between argument and adjunct extraction. In this paper we investigate the effect of long extraction of arguments and adjuncts where incompatibility is kept constant. Based on the results from two offline surveys and an online experiment, we argue that the argument/adjunct asymmetry in terms of acceptability is due to differences in processing difficulty, but that both types of extraction involve the same intermediate attachment sites in the online processing.

Argumentation in elementary science education: addressing methodological issues and conceptual understanding

Science.gov (United States)

Kaya, Ebru

2017-11-01

In this review essay I respond to issues raised in Mijung Kim and Wolff-Michael Roth's paper titled "Dialogical argumentation in elementary science classrooms", which presents a study dealing with dialogical argumentation in early elementary school classrooms. Since there is very limited research on lower primary school students' argumentation in school science, their paper makes a contribution to research on children's argumentation skills. In this response, I focus on two main issues to extend the discussion in Kim and Roth's paper: (a) methodological issues including conducting a quantitative study on children's argumentation levels and focusing on children's written argumentation in addition to their dialogical argumentation, and (b) investigating children's conceptual understanding along with their argumentation levels. Kim and Roth emphasize the difficulty in determining the level of children's argumentation through the Toulmin's Argument Pattern and lack of high level arguments by children due to their difficulties in writing texts. Regarding these methodological issues, I suggest designing quantitative research on coding children's argument levels because such research could potentially provide important findings on children's argumentation. Furthermore, I discuss alternative written products including posters, figures, or pictures generated by children in order to trace children's arguments, and finally articulating argumentation and conceptual understanding of children.

Arguments that take counterconsiderations into account

NARCIS (Netherlands)

van Laar, Jan Albert

2014-01-01

This paper examines arguments that take counterconsiderations into account, and it does so from a dialogical point of view. According to this 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

We have yet to see the "visual argument"

OpenAIRE

Popa, O.E.

2016-01-01

In this paper, I defend two skeptical claims regarding current research on visual arguments and I explain how these claims reflect upon past and future research. The first claim is that qualifying an argument as being visual amounts to a category mistake; the second claim is that past analyses of visual arguments fault on both end of the “production line” in that the input is not visual and the output is not an argument. Based on the developed critique, I discuss how the study of images in co...

Cross-Linguistic Variation in the Treatment of Beneficiaries and the Argument vs. Adjunct Distinction

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Denis Creissels

2014-01-01

Full Text Available This paper compares the expression of beneficiaries with that of typical arguments and typical adjuncts in a sample of languages illustrating the variation in the extent to which NPs encoding beneficiaries show a syntactic behavior more or less similar to that of typical arguments or typical adjuncts. The observations support the position according to which semantic argumenthood as a comparative concept must be distinguished from its possible syntactic correlates, and must be defined as a scalar rather than categorical concept reflecting the interaction between the various factors that may contribute to defining the degree of involvement of participants in an event.

Argument structure and the representation of abstract semantics.

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Javier Rodríguez-Ferreiro

Full Text Available According to the dual coding theory, differences in the ease of retrieval between concrete and abstract words are related to the exclusive dependence of abstract semantics on linguistic information. Argument structure can be considered a measure of the complexity of the linguistic contexts that accompany a verb. If the retrieval of abstract verbs relies more on the linguistic codes they are associated to, we could expect a larger effect of argument structure for the processing of abstract verbs. In this study, sets of length- and frequency-matched verbs including 40 intransitive verbs, 40 transitive verbs taking simple complements, and 40 transitive verbs taking sentential complements were presented in separate lexical and grammatical decision tasks. Half of the verbs were concrete and half were abstract. Similar results were obtained in the two tasks, with significant effects of imageability and transitivity. However, the interaction between these two variables was not significant. These results conflict with hypotheses assuming a stronger reliance of abstract semantics on linguistic codes. In contrast, our data are in line with theories that link the ease of retrieval with availability and robustness of semantic information.

Argument structure and the representation of abstract semantics.

Science.gov (United States)

Rodríguez-Ferreiro, Javier; Andreu, Llorenç; Sanz-Torrent, Mònica

2014-01-01

According to the dual coding theory, differences in the ease of retrieval between concrete and abstract words are related to the exclusive dependence of abstract semantics on linguistic information. Argument structure can be considered a measure of the complexity of the linguistic contexts that accompany a verb. If the retrieval of abstract verbs relies more on the linguistic codes they are associated to, we could expect a larger effect of argument structure for the processing of abstract verbs. In this study, sets of length- and frequency-matched verbs including 40 intransitive verbs, 40 transitive verbs taking simple complements, and 40 transitive verbs taking sentential complements were presented in separate lexical and grammatical decision tasks. Half of the verbs were concrete and half were abstract. Similar results were obtained in the two tasks, with significant effects of imageability and transitivity. However, the interaction between these two variables was not significant. These results conflict with hypotheses assuming a stronger reliance of abstract semantics on linguistic codes. In contrast, our data are in line with theories that link the ease of retrieval with availability and robustness of semantic information.

Understanding a High School Physics Teacher's Pedagogical Content Knowledge of Argumentation

Science.gov (United States)

Wang, Jianlan; Buck, Gayle A.

2016-08-01

Scientific argumentation is an important learning objective in science education. It is also an effective instructional approach to constructivist science learning. The implementation of argumentation in school settings requires science teachers, who are pivotal agents of transforming classroom practices, to develop sophisticated knowledge of argumentation. However, there is a lack of understanding about science teachers' knowledge of argumentation, especially the dialogic meaning of argumentation. In this case study, we closely examine a high school physics teacher's argumentation-related pedagogic content knowledge (PCK) in the context of dialogic argumentation. We synthesize the teacher's performed PCK from his argumentation practices and narrated PCK from his reflection on the argumentation practices, from which we summarize his PCK of argumentation from the perspectives of orientation, instructional strategies, students, curriculum, and assessment. Finally, we describe the teacher's perception and adaption of argumentation in his class. We also identity the barriers to argumentation implementation in this particular case and suggest solutions to overcome these barriers.

Reasoning by Argumentation. Social Studies Learning Milestone 4.

Science.gov (United States)

Voss, James F.

This paper is concerned with the importance of argumentation in the classroom, especially in relation to the social sciences. Issues of argument and argument evaluation are considered. The paper analyzes the nature of such reasoning and indicates its importance in subject matter learning. Three situations are described in the paper in which…

Consciousness regained? Philosophical arguments for and against reductive physicalism.

Science.gov (United States)

Sturm, Thomas

2012-03-01

This paper is an overview of recent discussions concerning the mind-body problem, which is being addressed at the interface between philosophy and neuroscience. It focuses on phenomenal features of consciousness or "qualia," which are distinguished from various related issues. Then follows a discussion of various influential skeptical arguments that question the possibility of reductive explanations of qualia in physicalist terms: knowledge arguments, conceivability arguments, the argument of multiple realizability, and the explanatory gap argument. None of the arguments is found to be very convincing. It does not necessarily follow that reductive physicalism is the only option, but it is defensible. However, constant conceptual and methodological reflection is required, alongside ongoing research, to keep such a view free from dogmatism and naivety.

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.

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...

Efficient computation of argumentation semantics

CERN Document Server

Liao, Beishui

2013-01-01

Efficient Computation of Argumentation Semantics addresses argumentation semantics and systems, introducing readers to cutting-edge decomposition methods that drive increasingly efficient logic computation in AI and intelligent systems. Such complex and distributed systems are increasingly used in the automation and transportation systems field, and particularly autonomous systems, as well as more generic intelligent computation research. The Series in Intelligent Systems publishes titles that cover state-of-the-art knowledge and the latest advances in research and development in intelligen

Public perceptions of arguments supporting and opposing recreational marijuana legalization.

Science.gov (United States)

McGinty, Emma E; Niederdeppe, Jeff; Heley, Kathryn; Barry, Colleen L

2017-06-01

In debates about recreational marijuana legalization, pro-legalization arguments highlighting economic and other potential policy benefits compete with anti-legalization arguments emphasizing public health risks. In 2016, we conducted a national survey using an online panel (N=979) designed to answer two main research questions: (1) How do Americans perceive the relative strength of competing arguments about recreational marijuana legalization? (2) How are perceptions of argument strength associated with public support for recreational marijuana legalization? We examined differences in attitudes among individuals living in states that have/have not legalized recreational marijuana and among Democrats/Independents/Republicans. Ordered logit regression assessed the relationship between perceived argument strength and public support for recreational marijuana legalization. Respondents rated pro-legalization arguments highlighting beneficial economic and criminal justice consequences as more persuasive than anti-legalization arguments emphasizing adverse public health effects. Respondents were more likely to agree with arguments highlighting legalization's potential to increase tax revenue (63.9%) and reduce prison overcrowding (62.8%) than arguments emphasizing negative consequences on motor vehicle crashes (51.8%) and youth health (49.6%). The highest rated anti-legalization arguments highlighted the conflict between state and federal marijuana laws (63.0%) and asserted that legalization will fail to eliminate the black market (57.2%). Respondents who endorsed pro-legalization economic and criminal justice arguments were more likely than other respondents to support legalization. Our findings indicate that, on both side of the recreational marijuana legalization debate, there are arguments that resonate with the American public. However, public health risk messages were viewed as less compelling than pro-legalization economic and criminal justice-oriented arguments

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.

Locative-Related Roles and the Argument-Adjunct Distinction in Balinese

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

I Wayan Arka

2014-01-01

Full Text Available This paper uses the realisation of locative-related roles in Balinese to show that there is no clear-cut distinction between arguments and adjuncts, supporting the gradient nature of grammatical functions (cf. Croft 2001; Langacker 1987; Aarts 2007. It argues that argumenthood is not wholly a property of a lexical head predicate and that a purely lexically based projectionist approach to syntactic argument structures cannot be maintained. It also explores the effect that the interplay between relevant properties of locatives has on their recruitability as arguments, and a novel argument-index analysis is proposed as a means to distinguish adjuncts from arguments. The analysis makes use of both general and language-specific morphosyntactic and morphosemantic tests. Investigation of locative-related roles reveals that certain properties determine their status in the argument-adjunct continuum: thematic, individuated and animate locatives are more argument-like than non-thematic, inanimate and general deictic locatives (in line with Kittila 2007, 2008; Peterson 2007. Interplay between these properties is shown to affect argument recruitment in Balinese, based on the value of the argument index for a given locative-related role. More generally, there also is evidence that languages vary in whether they allow true adjuncts to be recruited as arguments at all.

Children's responses in argumentative discussions relating to parental rules and prescriptions

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Antonio Bova

2015-01-01

Full Text Available This study sets out to investigate the types of responses by children aged between 3 and 7 years in argumentative discussions relating to parental rules and prescriptions. The data corpus is composed of 132 argumentative discussions selected from 30 video-recorded meals of 10 middle to upper-middle-class Swiss and Italian families. Data are presented through discursive excerpts of argumentative discussions and analysed by the pragma-dialectical ideal model of critical discussion. The findings show that when parents advance context-bound arguments such as the arguments of quality (e.g., very good, salty, or not good and quantity (e.g., too little, quite enough, or too much of food, the arguments advanced by children mirror the same types of arguments previously used by parents. On the other hand, when parents advance more complex, elaborated, and context-unbound arguments such as the appeal to consistency's argument, the argument from authority and the argument from analogy, the children typically did not advance any argument, but their response is an expression of further doubt or a mere opposition without providing any argument. Overall, the results of this study indicate that the types of children's responses are strictly connected to the type of argument previously advanced by their parents. This aspect is particularly relevant in terms of children's capacities to engage in argumentative exchanges and to react in rational ways during the confrontation with the parents. Further research in this direction is needed in order to better understand specific potentialities of language in the everyday process of socialization within the family context.

Prior knowledge in recalling arguments in bioethical dilemmas

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Hiemke Katharina Schmidt

2015-09-01

Full Text Available Prior knowledge is known to facilitate learning new information. Normally in studies confirming this outcome the relationship between prior knowledge and the topic to be learned is obvious: the information to be acquired is part of the domain or topic to which the prior knowledge belongs. This raises the question as to whether prior knowledge of various domains facilitates recalling information. In this study 79 eleventh-grade students completed a questionnaire on their prior knowledge of seven different domains related to the bioethical dilemma of prenatal diagnostics. The students read a text containing arguments for and arguments against prenatal diagnostics. After one week and again 12 weeks later they were asked to write down all the arguments they remembered. Prior knowledge helped them recall the arguments one week (r = .350 and 12 weeks (r = .316 later. Prior knowledge of three of the seven domains significantly helped them recall the arguments one week later (correlations between r = .194 to r = .394. Partial correlations with interest as a control item revealed that interest did not explain the relationship between prior knowledge and recall. Prior knowledge of different domains jointly supports the recall of arguments related to bioethical topics.

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

Concepts and Contexts – Argumentative Forms of Framing

DEFF Research Database (Denmark)

Gabrielsen, Jonas; Nørholm Just, Sine; Bengtsson, Mette

2011-01-01

this argument we combine theories of framing with the classical rhetorical theory of the stases, more precisely status definitio and status translatio. Our focus is primarily theoretical, but we illustrate our points by means of examples taken from public debates on the value of real estate.......The notion of framing has become central in the field of argumentation. The question is, however, what we gain from studying the process of argumentation through framing, since framing is itself a broad concept in need of specification. Different traditions understand the term differently......, and it is necessary to determine what argumentative forms the concept of framing actually covers. In this paper we argue that framing refers to at least two different argumentative forms. One is an internal definition of the concepts in question; the other is an external shift in the context of the case. In making...

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

Den argumentative teksttype i reklamer

DEFF Research Database (Denmark)

Nielsen, Anne Ellerup

1998-01-01

- and macropropositions, it is a multicriterial model which takes into account both the syntactic, semantic and pragmatic features of texts. However, the model seems to offer some problems in establishing the limits between the argumentative and the descriptive text type. This imprecision is apparently due to the lack...... of distinction between the discourse potential of evaluative and referential propositions. This problem will be demonstrated on examples from the genre of advertising material which, because of its persuasive purpose, is particularly rich in argumentative features....

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...

Risk and Argument: A Risk-based Argumentation Method for Practical Security

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Nunes Leal Franqueira, V.; Tun, Thein Tan; Yu, Yijun; Wieringa, Roelf J.; Nuseibeh, Bashar

When showing that a software system meets certain security requirements, it is often necessary to work with formal and informal descriptions of the system behavior, vulnerabilities, and threats from potential attackers. In earlier work, Haley et al. [1] showed structured argumentation could deal

Strategic Use of Multiple Texts for the Evaluation of Arguments

Science.gov (United States)

Kobayashi, Keiichi

2010-01-01

Two experiments were conducted to examine whether students use arguments with refutation in one text for evaluating the opposite arguments without refutation in another text. Undergraduate students read two conflicting texts in either of the two orders: pro arguments text first and con arguments text first. After reading each text, they evaluated…

Scaring the Public: Fear Appeal Arguments in Public Health Reasoning

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Louise Cummings

2012-03-01

Full Text Available The study of threat and fear appeal arguments has given rise to a sizeable literature. Even within a public health context, much is now known about how these arguments work to gain the public’s compliance with health recommendations. Notwithstanding this level of interest in, and examination of, these arguments, there is one aspect of these arguments that still remains unexplored. That aspect concerns the heuristic function of these arguments within our thinking about public health problems. Specifically, it is argued that threat and fear appeal arguments serve as valuable shortcuts in our reasoning, particularly when that reasoning is subject to biases that are likely to diminish the effectiveness of public health messages. To this extent, they are rationally warranted argument forms rather than fallacies, as has been their dominant characterization in logic.

Teaching Critical Questions about Argumentation through the Revising Process: Effects of Strategy Instruction on College Students' Argumentative Essays

Science.gov (United States)

Song, Yi; Ferretti, Ralph P.

2013-01-01

The effects of self-regulated strategy development revising instruction for college students that targeted the use of argumentation schemes and critical questions were assessed in three conditions. In the first condition, students were taught to revise their essays by asking and answering critical questions about the "argument from consequences"…

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 Peierls argument for higher dimensional Ising models

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Bonati, Claudio

2014-01-01

The Peierls argument is a mathematically rigorous and intuitive method to show the presence of a non-vanishing spontaneous magnetization in some lattice models. This argument is typically explained for the D = 2 Ising model in a way which cannot be easily generalized to higher dimensions. The aim of this paper is to present an elementary discussion of the Peierls argument for the general D-dimensional Ising model. (paper)

Extension-based semantics of argumentation frameworks for agent interactions

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Gratie, C.

2012-01-01

Argumentation plays an important part in human interaction, whether it is used for persuasion, negotiation or simply for sharing one's point of view on a certain topic. Even at the abstract level, choosing the acceptable arguments from a given set of conflicting arguments is a challenging problem,

Computer-Supported Argumentative Writer : An authoring tool with built-in scaffolding and self-regulation for novice writers of argumentative texts

OpenAIRE

Benetos, Kalliopi

2006-01-01

Argumentative writing is a valued genre in a range of disciplines and curricula because it requires that writers develop relationships between ideas and build a deep and multifaceted understanding of the topic. Due to the multifaceted demands, and inherent structure and conventions of argumentative writing, it is also among the most difficult to master. The aim of this masters thesis is to create a prototype of an authoring tool that can help novices (13-19 years old) of argumentative essay w...

Nursing and euthanasia: a review of argument-based ethics literature.

Science.gov (United States)

Quaghebeur, Toon; Dierckx de Casterlé, Bernadette; Gastmans, Chris

2009-07-01

This article gives an overview of the nursing ethics arguments on euthanasia in general, and on nurses' involvement in euthanasia in particular, through an argument-based literature review. An in-depth study of these arguments in this literature will enable nurses to engage in the euthanasia debate. We critically appraised 41 publications published between January 1987 and June 2007. Nursing ethics arguments on (nurses' involvement in) euthanasia are guided primarily by the principles of respect for autonomy, nonmaleficence, beneficence and justice. Ethical arguments related to the nursing profession are described. From a care perspective, we discuss arguments that evaluate to what degree euthanasia can be considered positively or negatively as a form of good nursing care. Most arguments in the principle-, profession- and care-orientated approaches to nursing ethics are used both pro and contra euthanasia in general, and nurses' involvement in euthanasia in particular.

Trying and the Arguments from Total Failure

DEFF Research Database (Denmark)

Grünbaum, Thor

2008-01-01

New Volitionalism is a name for certain widespread conception of the nature of intentional action. Some of the standard arguments for New Volitionalism, the so-called arguments from total failure, have even acquired the status of basic assumptions for many other kinds of philosophers. It is there...

The assessment of argumentation from expert opinion

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Wagemans, J.H.M.

2011-01-01

In this contribution, I will develop a comprehensive tool for the reconstruction and evaluation of argumentation from expert opinion. This is done by analyzing and then combining two dialectical accounts of this type of argumentation. Walton’s account of the ‘appeal to expert opinion’ provides a

Collective Acceptance and the Is-Ought Argument

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Hindriks, Frank

According to John Searle's well-known Is-Ought Argument, it is possible to derive an ought-statement from is-statements only. This argument concerns obligations involved in institutions such as promising, and it relies on the idea that institutions can be conceptualized in terms of constitutive

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.

Kunnen wij elke machine verslaan? Beschouwingen rondom Lucas’ argument

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Visser, A.

1986-01-01

In dit artikel wil ik niet Anselmus' Argument bespreken maar dat van Lucas -J.R.Lucas om precies to zijn. Lucas' Argument is gericht tegen de dwaas die in zijn hart zei: de mens is een machine. Het argument is kort, maakt gebruik van eenvoudige, maar diepe wiskundige stellingen -de

Slippery Slope Arguments

NARCIS (Netherlands)

van der Burg, W.; Chadwick, R.F.

1998-01-01

Slippery slope arguments hold that one should not take some action (which in itself may be innocuous or even laudable) in order to prevent one from being dragged down a slope towards some clearly undesirable situation. Their typical purpose is to prevent changes in the status quo and, therefore,

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

An Argument Approach to Observation Protocol Validity

Science.gov (United States)

Bell, Courtney A.; Gitomer, Drew H.; McCaffrey, Daniel F.; Hamre, Bridget K.; Pianta, Robert C.; Qi, Yi

2012-01-01

This article develops a validity argument approach for use on observation protocols currently used to assess teacher quality for high-stakes personnel and professional development decisions. After defining the teaching quality domain, we articulate an interpretive argument for observation protocols. To illustrate the types of evidence that might…

Identifying Kinds of Reasoning in Collective Argumentation

Science.gov (United States)

Conner, AnnaMarie; Singletary, Laura M.; Smith, Ryan C.; Wagner, Patty Anne; Francisco, Richard T.

2014-01-01

We combine Peirce's rule, case, and result with Toulmin's data, claim, and warrant to differentiate between deductive, inductive, abductive, and analogical reasoning within collective argumentation. In this theoretical article, we illustrate these kinds of reasoning in episodes of collective argumentation using examples from one…

[Textual pragmatics in adolescents with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: argument].

Science.gov (United States)

Gallardo-Paúls, B; Gimeno-Martínez, M; Moreno-Campos, V

2010-03-03

Clinical linguistics involves a study of linguistic deficits which focuses on a series of aspects that range from strictly formal, grammatical points to the effective and contextualised use of language. Thus, it is also inevitably concerned with the cognitive, i.e. mental, correlate of such language use, whose basic textual dimensions are narration and argument. To describe the argumentative skills in adolescents with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and to examine their relationship with academic achievement and sociability. We analysed 79 argumentative texts written by adolescents with ADHD, using a methodology from cognitive linguistics and from theories of argumentation with a dialogical foundation. Adolescents with ADHD provided a greater number of arguments than those in the control group, but with a higher predominance of emotional and negative sanction strategies compared with a greater use of fallacious or circular arguments in those in the control group; the difference between the use of rational arguments in the two groups is not significant.

Argument Structure in Arabic and English: Re-assessing Purity and Redeeming Hybridity

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Faisal Said Al-Maamari

2017-05-01

Full Text Available This study presents a contrastive rhetorical analysis of 20 argumentative Arabic and English editorials in argument structure. Samples were selected from two daily newspapers with equally wide distribution, and articles were written by their respective native writers. Both graphical and textual analyses captured the argument structure in terms of macro and micro arguments. A core finding is that the argument structure in the sampled editorials did not conform to the current predominant model of argument structure, which tended to polarize argument structure in terms of through or counter argumentation. The study contributes to the existing literature by defying the polarized traditional purity typology of argument structure frequently cited in the literature, and emphasizes a more dynamic hybrid model to understanding and analyzing arguments in general and in Arabic and English specifically. Additionally, the study of the professional genre of editorails has implications for academic writing and second language writing pedagogy by sensitizing foreign language learners to existing models of argument structure and possible ways to structure their arguments in the target language.

Argumentation as rational persuasion in doctor-patient communication

OpenAIRE

Rubinelli Sara

2013-01-01

This paper discusses the value of argumentation as an instrument for rational persuasion in doctor patient (and general health professional patient) communication. Argumentation can be used to influence those beliefs that form the basis of an individual's attitudes and decision making process. In the medical context argumentation can be used to legitimize the points of view of the doctor and the patient; to correct add to or modify a patient's set of beliefs; and to enhance the patient's cent...

Pupils' evaluation and generation of evidence and explanation in argumentation.

Science.gov (United States)

Glassner, Amnon; Weinstock, Michael; Neuman, Yair

2005-03-01

Studies on argument have found that participants tend to prefer explanations to evidence. This apparent bias toward explanation has been qualified recently by research that has found it to diminish with the availability of evidence. This study examines the use of explanation versus evidence in the context of argumentation with reference to the goals of particular argument situations. Seventy-nine eighth-grade pupils at a regular, urban middle school. The pupils read argumentation scenarios, each having the stated goal of either explaining or proving a claim. The pupils rated the degree to which each of two provided assertions (one a theoretical explanation, and the other evidence-based) helped achieve the goal of the argument. On a second task, the pupils chose which of the two assertions should be more effective in achieving the argument goal. On the third task, the pupils generated either an explanation or evidence for each of the argumentation scenarios. Pupils demonstrated sensitivity to the relative epistemic strength of explanation and evidence. They rated explanations as more advantageous in achieving the explanation goal, and evidence as more advantageous in achieving the proof goal. Conversely, however, when asked to generate or recall an explanation or evidence, pupils produced more explanations than evidence independent of the argumentation goal. The study refines the definition of argumentation context to include specific goals. Pupils were sensitive to the context of the argumentation situation (e.g.goals, availability of evidence). However, they appeared to have a disposition toward explanation when asked to produce an explanation or evidence-based justification.

Communication of geo-scientific safety arguments

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Flavelle, P.; Goodwin, B.; Jensen, M.; Linden, R.; Mazurek, M.; Srivastave, M.; Strom, A.; Sudicky, E.; Voinis, S.

2007-01-01

Working Group B addressed the communication of geo-scientific safety arguments through a discussion of practical experience as it related to the methods, types of information and specific arguments found to best communicate geo-scientific concepts and notions of safety with broad audiences including, colleagues, authorities and regulators, political decision makers, academics, and the general public. The following questions were suggested by the programme committee of the AMIGO-2 workshop for discussion by Working Group B with respect to the communication of geo-scientific information and safety arguments: - What is the place of geo-scientific arguments in relation to quantitative and qualitative topics like scenario and FEPs (features, events, processes) assessment, simulated repository evolution, calculated dose or risk impacts, engineering tests of materials, etc., when presenting a safety case to different audiences and with respect to the various stages of the repository programme? (see section 3). - Would we be better off focusing messages to the public on time scales of a few hundred years or a few generations? (see section 4). - How do you handle the fact that geoscience interpretations seldom are unique and data often are open to various interpretations? (see section 5). - How do you handle expert controversy on a specific topic? (see section 6). (authors)

Starkweather and Smith: Using "Contact Zones" to Teach Argument.

Science.gov (United States)

Schutt, Robin Muksian

1998-01-01

Describes how a professor teaching a "Writing Arguments" course focused on two cases involving the death penalty to show students how arguments are constructed, and how students can form strong arguments of their own. Notes that this approach does not force students to choose sides when they stand somewhere in the middle. Describes four…

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…

Learning about Plate Tectonics through Argument-Writing

Science.gov (United States)

Klein, Perry D.; Samuels, Boba

2010-01-01

In a quasi-experimental study (N = 60), grade 7/8 teachers students were taught to write arguments in content-area subjects. After instruction, students drew on document portfolios to write on a new topic: "Do the continents drift?" In a MANCOVA, students who participated in argument instruction scored significantly higher than a control…

The argument of mathematics

CERN Document Server

Aberdein, Andrew

2014-01-01

This book presents a comprehensive investigation into the relationship between argumentation theory and the philosophy of mathematical practice. It offers large array of examples ranging from the history of mathematics to formal proof verification.

The pedagogy of argumentation in science education: science teachers' instructional practices

Science.gov (United States)

Özdem Yilmaz, Yasemin; Cakiroglu, Jale; Ertepinar, Hamide; Erduran, Sibel

2017-07-01

Argumentation has been a prominent concern in science education research and a common goal in science curriculum in many countries over the past decade. With reference to this goal, policy documents burden responsibilities on science teachers, such as involving students in dialogues and being guides in students' spoken or written argumentation. Consequently, teachers' pedagogical practices regarding argumentation gain importance due to their impact on how they incorporate this practice into their classrooms. In this study, therefore, we investigated the instructional strategies adopted by science teachers for their argumentation-based science teaching. Participants were one elementary science teacher, two chemistry teachers, and four graduate students, who have a background in science education. The study took place during a graduate course, which was aimed at developing science teachers' theory and pedagogy of argumentation. Data sources included the participants' video-recorded classroom practices, audio-recorded reflections, post-interviews, and participants' written materials. The findings revealed three typologies of instructional strategies towards argumentation. They are named as Basic Instructional Strategies for Argumentation, Meta-level Instructional ‌St‌‌rategies for ‌Argumentation, and Meta-strategic Instructional ‌St‌‌rategies for ‌Argumentation. In conclusion, the study provided a detailed coding framework for the exploration of science teachers' instructional practices while they are implementing argumentation-based lessons.

Epistemic Purposes to Prompt Argumentation in inquiry-based classes

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Arthur Tadeu Ferraz

2017-04-01

Full Text Available Considering the growth in interest on argumentation in research on science education, in this paper our goal is to propose an overview of actions taken by a teacher that made possible to establish and mediate production of arguments by the students in classroom. For this purpose, we analyze a physics lesson where discussions were about light duality, through a planned inquiry-based sequence teaching. We developed a set of codes called Epistemic Purposes for Promotion of Argumentation that allow understanding teacher's purposes as well his actions to promote argumentation among students during inquiry-based lessons. According to theoretical proposition and empirical analysis, it was revealed that the construction of arguments by students has a high dependence on how ideas are problematized by teacher. The construction of understanding  by students requires teacher actions that result in contributions of different kinds.

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…

Problem-Based Learning and Argumentation: Testing a Scaffolding Framework to Support Middle School Students' Creation of Evidence-Based Arguments

Science.gov (United States)

Belland, Brian R.; Glazewski, Krista D.; Richardson, Jennifer C.

2011-01-01

Students engaged in problem-based learning (PBL) units solve ill-structured problems in small groups, and then present arguments in support of their solution. However, middle school students often struggle developing evidence-based arguments (Krajcik et al., "J Learn Sci" 7:313-350, 1998). Using a mixed method design, the researchers examined the…

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...

The sensitivity argument against child euthanasia.

Science.gov (United States)

Keeling, Geoff

2018-02-01

Is there a moral difference between euthanasia for terminally ill adults and euthanasia for terminally ill children? Luc Bovens considers five arguments to this effect, and argues that each is unsuccessful. In this paper, I argue that Bovens' dismissal of the sensitivity argument is unconvincing. 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/.

Un lieu pour les figures dans la théorie de l’argumentation A Place for Rhetorical Figures in Argumentation Theory

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Christian Plantin

2009-04-01

Full Text Available A partir du traitement des figures dans le Traité de l’Argumentation (TA de Perelman et Olbrechts-Tyteca, cet article porte sur la question de la place des figures dans la théorie de l’argumentation. La première partie revient brièvement sur différentes formes de rhétorique, dont une rhétorique de l’ornement ayant pour instrument principal les figures. Une théorie moderne de l’argumentation orientée vers la recherche des fallacies établit une coupure radicale entre argumentation, instrument de recherche de la vérité et rhétorique ornée, que Locke caractérise comme « a powerful instrument of error and deceit ». Cette conception suppose l’usage d’un langage qu’on peut rapidement caractériser comme « artificiel », qui n’est pas celui de l’argumentation ordinaire. Avant d’être des « decorations » les figures sont des « instruments » de structuration de la parole ; et les topoi, instruments de l’argumentation, n’obéissent pas à d’autres mécanismes que les tropes, qui semblent toujours parler à côté et manquer leur objet. La seconde partie s’intéresse à une partie quelque peu délaissée du TA, l’usage qu’il fait des figures et la vision théorique, à la fois cavalière et décisive, qu’il en propose. Le TA ouvre la voie à une conception des figures non pas comme « vain ornement » mais comme une première sémantique du discours argumentatif ; c’est ce qu’on peut montrer sur le cas des « figures du choix, de la présence et de la communion ». En conséquence, la pensée des figures peut et doit être intégrée à une théorie de l’argumentation qui prend en compte le langage dans la parole, avec ses stratégies de construction des objets, du locuteur, de l’interlocuteur et de leurs émotions.This paper deals with the treatment of figures of speech in Perelman’s and Olbrechts-Tyteca’s Treatise on Argumentation (TA, and, more broadly, with the place of

Conditional Independence in Applied Probability.

Science.gov (United States)

Pfeiffer, Paul E.

This material assumes the user has the background provided by a good undergraduate course in applied probability. It is felt that introductory courses in calculus, linear algebra, and perhaps some differential equations should provide the requisite experience and proficiency with mathematical concepts, notation, and argument. The document is…

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.

Examining Science Teachers' Argumentation in a Teacher Workshop on Earthquake Engineering

Science.gov (United States)

Cavlazoglu, Baki; Stuessy, Carol

2018-02-01

The purpose of this study was to examine changes in the quality of science teachers' argumentation as a result of their engagement in a teacher workshop on earthquake engineering emphasizing distributed learning approaches, which included concept mapping, collaborative game playing, and group lesson planning. The participants were ten high school science teachers from US high schools who elected to attend the workshop. To begin and end the teacher workshop, teachers in small groups engaged in concept mapping exercises with other teachers. Researchers audio-recorded individual teachers' argumentative statements about the inclusion of earthquake engineering concepts in their concept maps, which were then analyzed to reveal the quality of teachers' argumentation. Toulmin's argumentation model formed the framework for designing a classification schema to analyze the quality of participants' argumentative statements. While the analysis of differences in pre- and post-workshop concept mapping exercises revealed that the number of argumentative statements did not change significantly, the quality of participants' argumentation did increase significantly. As these differences occurred concurrently with distributed learning approaches used throughout the workshop, these results provide evidence to support distributed learning approaches in professional development workshop activities to increase the quality of science teachers' argumentation. Additionally, these results support the use of concept mapping as a cognitive scaffold to organize participants' knowledge, facilitate the presentation of argumentation, and as a research tool for providing evidence of teachers' argumentation skills.

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

THE IDEAS DEVELOPMENT OF ARGUMENTATIVE DISCOURSES OF INDONESIAN WRITERS FOUND IN THE OPINION FORUM OF THE JAKARTA POST

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Katharina Abbas Achmad adib Dwi Rukmini

2012-09-01

Full Text Available In this era, English is established as the world language of research and publication. This makes the English language significant for students and professionals. Tangkiengsirisin (2010, 1 states that text flow through a sequence of sentences is a main criterion for advanced writing. This research is aimed at finding out the flows of ideas of the English Arguments of Indonesian writers. This research applies topical, paradigmatic analysis. It involves identifying topics and sequences of topics/ ideas. After the topical analysis is done, the investigator contemplates the ideas development pattern of the entire essay. After analyzing fourteen English Arguments of Indonesian writers, it is found out that English Arguments of Indonesian writers are mostly developed linearly. It contradicts with Kaplan’s explanation (1966 that oriental groups express their ideas mostly in indirect ways. It means that at present Kaplan’s theory is partly valid. Even though the English Arguments of Indonesian writers are mostly developed linearly, it doesn’t mean that the teachers can ignore it in teaching Advanced Writing. Flow of ideas should become one of the materials of Advanced Writing to Indonesian learners, but it doesn’t need more teaching time allotment. Keywords: argumentative discourses, flow of ideas, linear, circular, parallel, digress

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

The features of argumentation skills formation problem in Higher Educational Establishment students

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Tamozhska I. V.

2010-01-01

Full Text Available Deals with argumentation skill formation in future specialist's professional preparation: kinds and ways of argumentation, influence of communicative co-operation means on compromise zones defining and general decision making, strategy choice in communicators' behavior at argumentation phase in a dialogue, defining of effective factors of convincing argumentation influence in communicators. The work suggests the system of methodological research means for argumentation skill formation in Higher Educational Establishment students, which helps professional language problem solving in composition with theoretical questions argumentation basis.

Methods for solving reasoning problems in abstract argumentation – A survey

Science.gov (United States)

Charwat, Günther; Dvořák, Wolfgang; Gaggl, Sarah A.; Wallner, Johannes P.; Woltran, Stefan

2015-01-01

Within the last decade, abstract argumentation has emerged as a central field in Artificial Intelligence. Besides providing a core formalism for many advanced argumentation systems, abstract argumentation has also served to capture several non-monotonic logics and other AI related principles. Although the idea of abstract argumentation is appealingly simple, several reasoning problems in this formalism exhibit high computational complexity. This calls for advanced techniques when it comes to implementation issues, a challenge which has been recently faced from different angles. In this survey, we give an overview on different methods for solving reasoning problems in abstract argumentation and compare their particular features. Moreover, we highlight available state-of-the-art systems for abstract argumentation, which put these methods to practice. PMID:25737590

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…

The Effect of Toulmin’s Model of Argumentation Within TWPS Strategy on Students’ Critical Thinking on Argumentative Essay

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Eko Suhartoyo

2015-12-01

Key Words: critical thinking, Toulmin’s model of argumentation, argumentative essay, Think-Write-Pair-Share strategy Abstrak: Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menyelidiki efektivitas model argumentasi Toulmin dalam strategi TWPS pada kemampuan berpikir kritis esai argumentative mahasiswa. Desain kuasi-eksperi-mental digunakan dengan pretest-posttest dan nonrandomized control group. Subjek dari penelitian ini adalah 38 mahasiswa semester IV di Jurusan Bahasa Inggris Universitas Negeri Malang. Kelompok eksperimen diteliti dengan menggunakan model argumentasi dalam strategi TWPS sedangkan kelom-pok kontrol diteliti tanpa strategi TWPS. Kemampuan berpikir kritis siswa diukur dengan menggunakan uji esai argumentatif. ANCOVA digunakan untuk menguji hipotesis. Temuan menunjukkan tidak ada perbedaan yang signifikan pada kemampuan berpikir kritis siswa. Namun, model argumentasi Toulmin dalam strategi TWPS terbukti meningkatkan berpikir kritis siswa seperti yang ditunjukkan oleh nilai rata-rata. Kata kunci: berpikir kritis, model argumentasi toulmin, esai argumentatif, Think-Pair-Share Write- strategy

The features of argumentation skills formation problem in Higher Educational Establishment students

OpenAIRE

Tamozhska I. V.

2010-01-01

Deals with argumentation skill formation in future specialist's professional preparation: kinds and ways of argumentation, influence of communicative co-operation means on compromise zones defining and general decision making, strategy choice in communicators' behavior at argumentation phase in a dialogue, defining of effective factors of convincing argumentation influence in communicators. The work suggests the system of methodological research means for argumentation skill formation in High...

Hardy's argument and successive spin-s measurements

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Ahanj, Ali

2010-01-01

We consider a hidden-variable theoretic description of successive measurements of noncommuting spin observables on an input spin-s state. In this scenario, the hidden-variable theory leads to a Hardy-type argument that quantum predictions violate it. We show that the maximum probability of success of Hardy's argument in quantum theory is ((1/2)) 4s , which is more than in the spatial case.

Investigating the Effect of Argument-Driven Inquiry in Laboratory Instruction

Science.gov (United States)

Demircioglu, Tuba; Ucar, Sedat

2015-01-01

The aim of this study is to investigate the effect of argument-driven inquiry (ADI) based laboratory instruction on the academic achievement, argumentativeness, science process skills, and argumentation levels of pre-service science teachers in the General Physics Laboratory III class. The study was conducted with 79 pre-service science teachers.…

On Evidence and Argument in Phenomenological Research | Walsh ...

African Journals Online (AJOL)

Set against a background of calls for evidence-based practice, this paper explores the role of evidence and argument in phenomenological research. Drawing on Smith's (1998) analysis of original argument, the author considers how evidence can be discerned, understood, and communicated, and the resulting kinds and ...

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.

Cross-Linguistic Evidence and the Licensing of Implicit Arguments

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Eva Kardos

2009-01-01

Full Text Available This paper discusses the occurrence and the licensing of implicit object arguments, also referred to in the literature as null complements or understood arguments. Functionalist accounts (such as those by Groefsema and Németh T. which are couched in a relevance-theoretic framework have repeatedly claimed that this phenomenon is fundamentally dependent on dis-course-interpretational factors. In particular, it has been stated that implicit arguments can be used in Hungarian in a rather unrestricted way, and their occurrence is only limited by considerations of interpretability. We argue against both of these positions and try to show that cross-linguistic data can assist in revealing the circular nature and ultimate inadequacy of existing functional accounts of implicit argument licensing.

A computer simulation of the argument from disagreement

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Gustafsson, J.E.; Peterson, M.B.

2012-01-01

In this paper we shed new light on the Argument from Disagreement by putting it to test in a computer simulation. According to this argument widespread and persistent disagreement on ethical issues indicates that our moral opinions are not influenced by any moral facts, either because no such facts

Arguments densos

OpenAIRE

Lopez de la Vieja, Mª Teresa

1999-01-01

Aquest article tracta de l'ús cognitiu dels textos literaris. Seguint els suggeriments d'una Novel·la, Der Vater eines Mörders, d'A Andersch, tractem d'elucidar la funció cognitiva, fins i tot argumentativa, de la literatura. Alguns arguments poden donar soportea aquest model: a) En la majoria dels casos, la filosofia moral no té a la seva disposició informació sobre situacions extremes i, d'altra banda, la filosofia no hauria de negligir aquestes experiències; b) La possibilitat de re...

We have yet to see the "visual argument"

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Popa, O.E.

2016-01-01

In this paper, I defend two skeptical claims regarding current research on visual arguments and I explain how these claims reflect upon past and future research. The first claim is that qualifying an argument as being visual amounts to a category mistake; the second claim is that past analyses of

Introducing Argumentation About Climate Change Socioscientific Issues in a Disadvantaged School

Science.gov (United States)

Dawson, Vaille; Carson, Katherine

2018-03-01

Improving the ability of young people to construct arguments about controversial science topics is a desired outcome of science education. The purpose of this research was to evaluate the impact of an argumentation intervention on the socioscientific issue of climate change with Year 10 students in a disadvantaged Australian school. After participation in a professional development workshop on climate change science, socioscientific issues and argumentation, an early career teacher explicitly taught argumentation over four non-consecutive lessons as part of a 4 week (16 lesson) topic on Earth science. Thirty students completed a pre- and post-test questionnaire to determine their understanding of climate change science and their ability to construct an argument about a climate change socioscientific issue. Students' understanding of climate change improved significantly (p size. There was also a significant increase (p Qualitative data, comprising classroom observation field notes, lesson transcripts, work samples, and teacher and student interviews, were analysed for the extent to which the students' argumentation skills improved. At the end of the intervention, students became aware of the need to justify their decisions with scientific evidence. It is concluded that introducing argumentation about climate change socioscientific issues to students in a disadvantaged school can improve their argumentation skills.

The Effects of Argumentation Implementation on Environmental Education Self Efficacy Beliefs and Perspectives According to Environmental Problems

Science.gov (United States)

Fettahlioglu, Pinar

2018-01-01

The purpose of this study is to investigate the effect of argumentation implementation applied in the environmental science course on science teacher candidates' environmental education self-efficacy beliefs and perspectives according to environmental problems. In this mixed method research study, convergent parallel design was utilized.…

Predicting Immediate Belief Change and Adherence to Argument Claims.

Science.gov (United States)

Hample, Dale

1978-01-01

Discusses the probative potential of evidence in argument, and evaluates the importance of evidence in predicting belief change. Predicts adherence to argument claims and confirms the traditionally recognized importance of evidence to persuasion. (JMF)

Similarities and differences of alkali metal chlorides applied in organic light-emitting diodes

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Lü, Zhaoyue; Deng, Zhenbo; Hou, Ying; Xu, Haisheng

2012-01-01

The similarities and differences of alkali metal chlorides (sodium chloride (NaCl), potassium chloride (KCl), rubidium chloride (RbCl) and cesium chloride (CsCl)) applied in organic light-emitting diodes (OLEDs) are investigated. The behavior is similar for the OLEDs with these four chlorides as electron injection layer (EIL). Their maximum luminance and efficiency at 100 mA/cm 2 are within the ranges of 18 550 ± 600 (cd/m 2 ) with an error of 3.23% and 4.09 ± 0.15 (cd/A) within an error of 3.67%, respectively. The similar performance is due to almost identical electron injection barrier for NaCl, KCl, RbCl and CsCl as EIL. Interestingly, the properties are different for devices with chlorides inserted inside tris (8-hydroxyquinoline) aluminum at the position of 20 nm away from aluminum cathode, labeled as NaCl-, KCl-, RbCl- and CsCl- devices. The relation of luminance is CsCl- > RbCl- = KCl- > NaCl-, where “>” and “=” mean “better than” and “the same as”, respectively. And the device efficiencies are decreased from CsCl to NaCl. That is, the sort order of the efficiencies is CsCl- > RbCl- > KCl- > NaCl-. The mechanism is explained by tunneling model in terms of various energy gaps estimated by optical electronegativity of NaCl, KCl, RbCl and CsCl. - Highlights: ► Effects of NaCl, KCl, RbCl and CsCl in organic light-emitting diodes are compared. ► The similar performance is due to almost identical electron injection barrier. ► The different behavior of chlorides inside Alq 3 is explained by tunneling model. ► The different behavior is attributed to various energy gaps of different chlorides. ► The efficiency of device with chlorides inside Alq 3 is decreased from CsCl to NaCl.

Towards Real-Time Argumentation

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Vicente JULIÁN

2016-07-01

Full Text Available In this paper, we deal with the problem of real-time coordination with the more general approach of reaching real-time agreements in MAS. Concretely, this work proposes a real-time argumentation framework in an attempt to provide agents with the ability of engaging in argumentative dialogues and come with a solution for their underlying agreement process within a bounded period of time. The framework has been implemented and evaluated in the domain of a customer support application. Concretely, we consider a society of agents that act on behalf of a group of technicians that must solve problems in a Technology Management Centre (TMC within a bounded time. This centre controls every process implicated in the provision of technological and customer support services to private or public organisations by means of a call centre. The contract signed between the TCM and the customer establishes penalties if the specified time is exceeded.

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.

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…

Building a Validity Argument for the Test of English as a Foreign Language™

CERN Document Server

Chapelle, Carol A; Jamieson, Joan M

2007-01-01

Building a Validity Argument for the Test of English as a Foreign Language™ is distinctive in its attempt to develop a coherent story of the rationale for a test or its revision, explain the research and development process, and provide the results of the validation process. This volume is particularly relevant for professionals and graduate students in educational measurement, applied linguistics, and second language acquisition as well as anyone interested in assessment issues.

The case against libertarian arguments for compulsory vaccination.

Science.gov (United States)

Bernstein, Justin

2017-11-01

In a recent paper in this journal, Jason Brennan correctly notes that libertarians struggle to justify a policy of compulsory vaccination. The most straightforward argument that justifies compulsory vaccination is that such a policy promotes welfare. But libertarians cannot make this argument because they claim that the state is justified only in protecting negative rights, not in promoting welfare. I consider two representative libertarian attempts to justify compulsory vaccination, and I argue that such arguments are unsuccessful. They either fail to show that the state is justified in implementing the policy or overgeneralise. I suggest that Brennan's solution is especially well motivated insofar as it addresses the shortcomings of these arguments. Brennan argues that we violate the rights of others by participating in an activity that imposes an unacceptable collective risk of harm. Going unvaccinated is an activity that imposes an unacceptable collective risk of harm, and thus amounts to a rights violation. So, the state can implement a policy of compulsory vaccination I object, however, that Brennan's delineation of acceptable and unacceptable risk implicitly rests on classical liberal rather than libertarian principles; he justifies compulsory vaccination on the grounds that it promotes welfare. I also object that Brennan's argument would entail significant departures from libertarian institutional arrangements. This leaves libertarians with a choice: they can develop new arguments to demonstrate that their position is compatible with compulsory vaccination, or they can accept that their view entails the impermissibility of compulsory vaccination, and argue that this is not an unpalatable implication of their view. 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/.

Levy Stable Processes. From Stationary to Self-Similar Dynamics and Back. An Application to Finance

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Burnecki, K.; Weron, A.

2004-01-01

We employ an ergodic theory argument to demonstrate the foundations of ubiquity of Levy stable self-similar processes in physics and present a class of models for anomalous and nonextensive diffusion. A relationship between stationary and self-similar models is clarified. The presented stochastic integral description of all Levy stable processes could provide new insights into the mechanism underlying a range of self-similar natural phenomena. Finally, this effect is illustrated by self-similar approach to financial modelling. (author)

Examining the Value of a Scaffolded Critique Framework to Promote Argumentative and Explanatory Writings Within an Argument-Based Inquiry Approach

Science.gov (United States)

Jang, Jeong-yoon; Hand, Brian

2017-12-01

This study investigated the value of using a scaffolded critique framework to promote two different types of writing—argumentative writing and explanatory writing—with different purposes within an argument-based inquiry approach known as the Science Writing Heuristic (SWH) approach. A quasi-experimental design with sixth and seventh grade students taught by two teachers was used. A total of 170 students participated in the study, with 87 in the control group (four classes) and 83 in the treatment group (four classes). All students used the SWH templates as an argumentative writing to guide their written work and completed these templates during the SWH investigations of each unit. After completing the SWH investigations, both groups of students were asked to complete the summary writing task as an explanatory writing at the end of each unit. All students' writing samples were scored using analytical frameworks developed for the study. The results indicated that the treatment group performed significantly better on the explanatory writing task than the control group. In addition, the results of the partial correlation suggested that there is a very strong significantly positive relationship between the argumentative writing and the explanatory writing.

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

A complete characterisation of All-versus-Nothing arguments for stabiliser states

OpenAIRE

Abramsky, Samson; Barbosa, Rui Soares; Carù, Giovanni; Perdrix, Simon

2017-01-01

An important class of contextuality arguments in quantum foundations are the All-versus-Nothing (AvN) proofs, generalising a construction originally due to Mermin. We present a general formulation of All-versus-Nothing arguments, and a complete characterisation of all such arguments which arise from stabiliser states. We show that every AvN argument for an n-qubit stabiliser state can be reduced to an AvN proof for a three-qubit state which is local Clifford-equivalent to the tripartite GHZ s...

Conjunctions in Argumentative Writing of Libyan Tertiary Students

Science.gov (United States)

Hamed, Muftah

2014-01-01

The aim of this study was an attempt to investigate the use of conjunctions in argumentative essays written by English as a Foreign Language fourth-year undergraduate Libyan students majoring in English at Omar Al-Mukhtar University in Libya. A corpus of 32 argumentative essays was collected from a sample of 16 students in order to be investigated…

Advancing teacher knowledge of effective argumentation pedagogy

OpenAIRE

Simon,Shirley; Davies,Paul; Trevethan,Jillian

2012-01-01

This paper provides a discussion of the methodological approach to a research project that builds on previous studies of effective argumentation pedagogy undertaken by one of the authors. In this study, teachers from six schools in a city location are taking part in a one-year project to use new web-based professional development materials to advance their practice in using group discussion and argumentation in science. The teachers attend workshops on planning and organising effective group-...

The harm argument against surrogacy revisited: two versions not to forget.

Science.gov (United States)

Agnafors, Marcus

2014-08-01

It has been a common claim that surrogacy is morally problematic since it involves harm to the child or the surrogate-the harm argument. Due to a growing body of empirical research, the harm argument has seen a decrease in popularity, as there seems to be little evidence of harmful consequences of surrogacy. In this article, two revised versions of the harm argument are developed. It is argued that the two suggested versions of the harm argument survive the current criticism against the standard harm argument. The first version argues that the child is harmed by being separated from the gestational mother. The second version directs attention to the fact that surrogacy involves great incentives to keep the gestational mother's level of maternal-fetal attachment low, which tend to increase the risk of harm to the child. While neither of the two arguments is conclusive regarding the moral status of surrogacy, both constitute important considerations that are often ignored.

A complete characterization of all-versus-nothing arguments for stabilizer states

Science.gov (United States)

Abramsky, Samson; Barbosa, Rui Soares; Carù, Giovanni; Perdrix, Simon

2017-10-01

An important class of contextuality arguments in quantum foundations are the all-versus-nothing (AvN) proofs, generalizing a construction originally due to Mermin. We present a general formulation of AvN arguments and a complete characterization of all such arguments that arise from stabilizer states. We show that every AvN argument for an n-qubit stabilizer state can be reduced to an AvN proof for a three-qubit state that is local Clifford-equivalent to the tripartite Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger state. This is achieved through a combinatorial characterization of AvN arguments, the AvN triple theorem, whose proof makes use of the theory of graph states. This result enables the development of a computational method to generate all the AvN arguments in on n-qubit stabilizer states. We also present new insights into the stabilizer formalism and its connections with logic. This article is part of the themed issue `Second quantum revolution: foundational questions'.

Blandford's argument: The strongest continuous gravitational wave signal

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Knispel, Benjamin; Allen, Bruce

2008-01-01

For a uniform population of neutron stars whose spin-down is dominated by the emission of gravitational radiation, an old argument of Blandford states that the expected gravitational-wave amplitude of the nearest source is independent of the deformation and rotation frequency of the objects. Recent work has improved and extended this argument to set upper limits on the expected amplitude from neutron stars that also emit electromagnetic radiation. We restate these arguments in a more general framework, and simulate the evolution of such a population of stars in the gravitational potential of our galaxy. The simulations allow us to test the assumptions of Blandford's argument on a realistic model of our galaxy. We show that the two key assumptions of the argument (two dimensionality of the spatial distribution and a steady-state frequency distribution) are in general not fulfilled. The effective scaling dimension D of the spatial distribution of neutron stars is significantly larger than two, and for frequencies detectable by terrestrial instruments the frequency distribution is not in a steady state unless the ellipticity is unrealistically large. Thus, in the cases of most interest, the maximum expected gravitational-wave amplitude does have a strong dependence on the deformation and rotation frequency of the population. The results strengthen the previous upper limits on the expected gravitational-wave amplitude from neutron stars by a factor of 6 for realistic values of ellipticity.

Architecture-based regulatory compliance argumentation

DEFF Research Database (Denmark)

Mihaylov, Boyan; Onea, Lucian; Hansen, Klaus Marius

2016-01-01

Standards and regulations are difficult to understand and map to software, which makes compliance with them challenging to argue for software products and development process. This is problematic since lack of compliance may lead to issues with security, safety, and even to economic sanctions....... An increasing number of applications (for example in healthcare) are expected to have to live up to regulatory requirements in the future, which will lead to more software development projects having to deal with such requirements. We present an approach that models regulations such that compliance arguments...... the approach on the migration of the telemedicine platform Net4Care to the cloud, where certain regulations (for example privacy) should be concerned. The approach has the potential to support simpler compliance argumentation with the eventual promise of safer and more secure applications....

Argumentation, confrontation et violence verbale fulgurante Argumentative Processes, Confrontation and Acute Verbal Abuse

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Claudine Moïse

2012-04-01

Full Text Available Si nous avons défini la violence verbale fulgurante comme une montée en tension caractérisée par des actes menaçants directs (provocation, menace, insultes… et la violence polémique comme un discours à visée argumentative mobilisant des procédés discursifs indirects (implicites, ironie…, on ne peut considérer ces deux types de discours comme hermétiques. À travers des scènes de violences verbales quotidiennes dans l’espace public et institutionnel (contrôles, convocations, verbalisations…, constituées pour un DVD pédagogique, il s’agit de montrer comment dans des interactions caractérisées par la violence fulgurante, certains procédés argumentatifs particuliers et que nous décrirons, sont utilisés, avec force efficacité, à des fins de déstabilisation et de prise de pouvoir sur l’autre. Our research has defined severe verbal abuse as built up tension characterized by directly threatening acts (such as provocation, threats, insults, and polemical violence as argumentative discourse which mobilizes indirect discursive devices, such as implicit discourse relations and irony. Yet, neither type of discourse can be considered to be impervious to mutual influence. Based on the content of an educational DVD featuring acted out scenes of daily verbal abuse taking place in public and institutional spaces (i.e., checks, summons, fines, we will show how specific argumentative devices, which we will describe, are very efficiently used within interactions that are characterised by severe abuse, with the aim of destabilizing and taking control over somebody.

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.

A simple argument for confinement in the large N limit of SU(N)

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Durhuus, B.; Olesen, P.

1981-03-01

Using rather general assumptions it is shown that the QCD vacuum consists of a condensate of color magnetic vortices in the large N limit of the SU(N) gauge group. In this argument it is important that the gauge group has a non-trivial center. Some observations are also made on the finite N case in the strong coupling lattice gauge theory, and it is shown that there is much similarity between N=infinity and N finite. (Auth.)

Ring-Shaped Potential and a Class of Relevant Integrals Involved Universal Associated Legendre Polynomials with Complicated Arguments

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Wei Li

2017-01-01

Full Text Available We find that the solution of the polar angular differential equation can be written as the universal associated Legendre polynomials. Its generating function is applied to obtain an analytical result for a class of interesting integrals involving complicated argument, that is, ∫-11Pl′m′xt-1/1+t2-2xtPk′m′(x/(1+t2-2tx(l′+1/2dx, where t∈(0,1. The present method can in principle be generalizable to the integrals involving other special functions. As an illustration we also study a typical Bessel integral with a complicated argument ∫0∞Jn(αx2+z2/(x2+z2nx2m+1dx.

Effects of argument quality, source credibility and self-reported diabetes knowledge on message attitudes: an experiment using diabetes related messages.

Science.gov (United States)

Lin, Tung-Cheng; Hwang, Lih-Lian; Lai, Yung-Jye

2017-05-17

Previous studies have reported that credibility and content (argument quality) are the most critical factors affecting the quality of health information and its acceptance and use; however, this causal relationship merits further investigation in the context of health education. Moreover, message recipients' prior knowledge may moderate these relationships. This study used the elaboration likelihood model to determine the main effects of argument quality, source credibility and the moderating effect of self-reported diabetes knowledge on message attitudes. A between-subjects experimental design using an educational message concerning diabetes for manipulation was applied to validate the effects empirically. A total of 181 participants without diabetes were recruited from the Department of Health, Taipei City Government. Four group messages were manipulated in terms of argument quality (high and low) × source credibility (high and low). Argument quality and source credibility of health information significantly influenced the attitude of message recipients. The participants with high self-reported knowledge participants exhibited significant disapproval for messages with low argument quality. Effective health information should provide objective descriptions and cite reliable sources; in addition, it should provide accurate, customised messages for recipients who have high background knowledge level and ability to discern message quality. © 2017 Health Libraries Group Health Information & Libraries Journal.

Improving Argumentation through Goal Instructions in Asynchronous Online Discussions

Science.gov (United States)

Prudchenko, Yekaterina

2014-01-01

Argumentation incorporated into class discussions can improve students' problem solving skills and enhance their epistemic and conceptual understanding. Research indicates students sometimes need scaffolding such as goal instructions to improve their argumentation skills. This study examined the effectiveness of different types of goal…

Pascal’s wager: tracking an intended reader in the structure of the argument

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Iva SVAČINOVÁ

2016-12-01

Full Text Available Pascal’s wager is the name of an argument in favor of belief in God presented by Blaise Pascal in §233 of Thoughts. Ian Hacking (1972 pointed out that Pascal’s text involves three different versions of the argument. This paper proceeds from this identification, but it concerns an examination of the rhetorical strategy realized by Pascal’s argumentation. The final form of Pascal’s argument is considered as a product that could be established only through a specific process of persuasion led with respect to an intended reader with a particular set of initial beliefs. The text uses insights from the pragma‑dialectical approach to argumentation, especially the concept of rhetorical effectiveness of particular choices from the topical potential. The argumentation structure of Pascal’s wager is considered to be a reflection of the anticipated course of dialogue with the reader critically testing the sustainability of Pascal’s standpoint “You should believe in God”. Based on the argumentation reconstruction of three versions of the argument, Pascal’s idea of opponent/audience is identified. A rhetorical analysis of the effects of his argumentative strategy is proposed. The analysis is based on two perspectives on Pascal’s argument: it examines the strategy implemented consistently by all arguments and the strategy of a formulation of different versions of the wager.

Argumentative Polylogues: Beyond Dialectical Understanding of Fallacies

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Lewiński Marcin

2014-03-01

Full Text Available Dialectical fallacies are typically defined as breaches of the rules of a regulated discussion between two participants (di-logue. What if discussions become more complex and involve multiple parties with distinct positions to argue for (poly-logues? Are there distinct argumentation norms of polylogues? If so, can their violations be conceptualized as polylogical fallacies? I will argue for such an approach and analyze two candidates for argumentative breaches of multi-party rationality: false dilemma and collateral straw man.

Negotiation and argumentation in multi-agent systems

CERN Document Server

Lopes, Fernando

2014-01-01

Multi-agent systems (MAS) composed of autonomous agents representing individuals or organizations and capable of reaching mutually beneficial agreements through negotiation and argumentation are becoming increasingly important and pervasive.Research on both automated negotiation and argumentation in MAS has a vigorous, exciting tradition. However, efforts to integrate both areas have received only selective attention in the academia and the practitioner literature. A symbiotic relationship could significantly strengthen each area's progress and trigger new R&D challenges and prospects toward t

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.

Social Media Argumentation Mining: The Quest for Deliberateness in Raucousness

OpenAIRE

Šnajder, Jan

2016-01-01

Argumentation mining from social media content has attracted increasing attention. The task is both challenging and rewarding. The informal nature of user-generated content makes the task dauntingly difficult. On the other hand, the insights that could be gained by a large-scale analysis of social media argumentation make it a very worthwhile task. In this position paper I discuss the motivation for social media argumentation mining, as well as the tasks and challenges involved.

Four arguments in favour of nuclear power

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Pearce, D.

1994-01-01

The first argument in favour of nuclear power is scarcity of energy supplies. In about 40 years time, the world will face shortages of natural gas, oil and uranium. Recoverable reserves of coal are very great, but coal creates the highest environmental damage. A balanced portfolio is the second argument. If all energy sources are potentially scarce, then all energy sources must be developed, subject to environmental impact. This leads to the third argument in support of nuclear power, its expansion would contribute to combating the risk of global warming as indeed would the expansion of renewable sources and other low carbon technologies. Fourthly, nuclear power can make a significant contribution to the control of acidic emissions. While nuclear power is not without its own problems of risk, liability and public acceptance, it has some clear advantages over other fuels. It has, at the very least, to be a substantial part of the transitional phase towards a renewable energy world. (UK)

An integrated theory of causal scenarios and evidential arguments

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Bex, F.J.

2015-01-01

In the process of proof alternative stories that explain 'what happened' in a case are tested using arguments based on evidence. Building on the author's earlier hybrid theory, this paper presents a formal theory that combines causal stories and evidential arguments, further integrating the

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.

RHETORICAL STRUCTURE OF ARGUMENTATIVE ANSWER

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Juliano Desiderato ANTONIO

2014-12-01

Full Text Available The aim of this paper is to describe the rhetorical structure of the argumentative answer genre in a corpus formed by 15 compositions of the winter vestibular of Universidade Estadual de Maringá. The instrument of analysis used in the investigation was RST (Rhetorical Structure Theory. The initial statement was considered the central unit of the argumentative answer. Most of the writers held evidence relation between the central unit (nucleus and the expansion (satellite. Evidence relation is interpersonal and the aim of the writers is to convince their addressees (in this case the compositions evaluation committee that their point is correct. Within the initial statement, the relation with higher frequency was contrast. Our hypothesis is that the selection of texts of the test influenced the applicants to present positive and negative aspects of the internet. In the higher level of the expansion text span, list is the most frequent relation because the applicants present various arguments with the same status. Contrast was the second relation with highest frequency in this same level. Our hypothesis is that the selection of texts of the test influenced the applicants to present positive and negative aspects of the internet as it happened in the initial statement. Within the 15 compositions, 12 had a conclusion. This part was considered a satellite of the span formed by the initial statement and its expansion. The relation held was homonymous.

Acquiring and processing verb argument structure: distributional learning in a miniature language.

Science.gov (United States)

Wonnacott, Elizabeth; Newport, Elissa L; Tanenhaus, Michael K

2008-05-01

Adult knowledge of a language involves correctly balancing lexically-based and more language-general patterns. For example, verb argument structures may sometimes readily generalize to new verbs, yet with particular verbs may resist generalization. From the perspective of acquisition, this creates significant learnability problems, with some researchers claiming a crucial role for verb semantics in the determination of when generalization may and may not occur. Similarly, there has been debate regarding how verb-specific and more generalized constraints interact in sentence processing and on the role of semantics in this process. The current work explores these issues using artificial language learning. In three experiments using languages without semantic cues to verb distribution, we demonstrate that learners can acquire both verb-specific and verb-general patterns, based on distributional information in the linguistic input regarding each of the verbs as well as across the language as a whole. As with natural languages, these factors are shown to affect production, judgments and real-time processing. We demonstrate that learners apply a rational procedure in determining their usage of these different input statistics and conclude by suggesting that a Bayesian perspective on statistical learning may be an appropriate framework for capturing our findings.

Argumentation in Science Class: Its Planning, Practice, and Effect on Student Motivation

Science.gov (United States)

Taneja, Anju

Studies have shown an association between argumentative discourse in science class, better understanding of science concepts, and improved academic performance. However, there is lack of research on how argumentation can increase student motivation. This mixed methods concurrent nested study uses Bandura's construct of motivation and concepts of argumentation and formative feedback to understand how teachers orchestrate argumentation in science class and how it affects motivation. Qualitative data was collected through interviews of 4 grade-9 science teachers and through observing teacher-directed classroom discourse. Classroom observations allowed the researcher to record the rhythm of discourse by characterizing teacher and student speech as teacher presentation (TP), teacher guided authoritative discussion (AD), teacher guided dialogic discussion (DD), and student initiation (SI). The Student Motivation Towards Science Learning survey was administered to 67 students before and after a class in which argumentation was used. Analysis of interviews showed teachers collaborated to plan argumentation. Analysis of discourse identified the characteristics of argumentation and provided evidence of students' engagement in argumentation in a range of contexts. Student motivation scores were tested using Wilcoxon signed rank tests and Mann-Whitney U-tests, which showed no significant change. However, one construct of motivation---active learning strategy---significantly increased. Quantitative findings also indicate that teachers' use of multiple methods in teaching science can affect various constructs of students' motivation. This study promotes social change by providing teachers with insight about how to engage all students in argumentation.

Evidence and argument in policymaking: development of workplace smoking legislation

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Bero Lisa A

2009-06-01

Full Text Available Abstract Background We sought to identify factors that affect the passage of public health legislation by examining the use of arguments, particularly arguments presenting research evidence, in legislative debates regarding workplace smoking restrictions. Methods We conducted a case-study based content analysis of legislative materials used in the development of six state workplace smoking laws, including written and spoken testimony and the text of proposed and passed bills and amendments. We coded testimony given before legislators for arguments used, and identified the institutional affiliations of presenters and their position on the legislation. We compared patterns in the arguments made in testimony to the relative strength of each state's final legislation. Results Greater discussion of scientific evidence within testimony given was associated with the passage of workplace smoking legislation that provided greater protection for public health, regardless of whether supporters outnumbered opponents or vice versa. Conclusion Our findings suggest that an emphasis on scientific discourse, relative to other arguments made in legislative testimony, might help produce political outcomes that favor public health.

Citation Behaviors Observed in Japanese EFL Students' Argumentative Writing

Science.gov (United States)

Kamimura, Taeko

2014-01-01

Effective use of outside source texts is one of the key components of successful academic writing. This study aims at clarifying Japanese university EFL students' citation behaviors in producing argumentative writing. Twenty-six Japanese university EFL students wrote an argumentative essay. Their essays were analyzed quantitatively by six…

Two Studies Examining Argumentation in Asynchronous Computer Mediated Communication

Science.gov (United States)

Joiner, Richard; Jones, Sarah; Doherty, John

2008-01-01

Asynchronous computer mediated communication (CMC) would seem to be an ideal medium for supporting development in student argumentation. This paper investigates this assumption through two studies. The first study compared asynchronous CMC with face-to-face discussions. The transactional and strategic level of the argumentation (i.e. measures of…

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.…

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.

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.

A Robust Geometric Model for Argument Classification

Science.gov (United States)

Giannone, Cristina; Croce, Danilo; Basili, Roberto; de Cao, Diego

Argument classification is the task of assigning semantic roles to syntactic structures in natural language sentences. Supervised learning techniques for frame semantics have been recently shown to benefit from rich sets of syntactic features. However argument classification is also highly dependent on the semantics of the involved lexicals. Empirical studies have shown that domain dependence of lexical information causes large performance drops in outside domain tests. In this paper a distributional approach is proposed to improve the robustness of the learning model against out-of-domain lexical phenomena.

Method to translate human feelings into arguments

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Hans, Arnold

1995-01-01

Taking as an example the status of nuclear power in Netherlands, it was shown that there is an emotional approach on the part of supporters and opponents, not open to rational argument, objective information of no avail, lack of public support (80% against), Government undecided. It was concluded that nuclear energy is a deep-rooted emotional conflict, and that the prospects of altering the situation are bleak. Proposed arguments for changeover in favor of nuclear energy are: electricity is a necessity, it is economical, safety is guaranteed, it protects the environment and conserves other resources

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.

Improving Undergraduates' Argumentative Group Essay Writing through Self-Assessment

Science.gov (United States)

Fung, Yong Mei; Mei, Hooi Chee

2015-01-01

When writing an argumentative essay, writers develop and evaluate arguments to embody, initiate, or simulate various kinds of interpersonal and textual interaction for reader consideration (Wu & Allison, 2003). This is quite challenging for English as a second language (ESL) learners. To improve the quality of their writing, students need to…

"Argument!" Helping Students Understand What Essay Writing Is About

Science.gov (United States)

Wingate, Ursula

2012-01-01

Argumentation is a key requirement of the essay, which is the most common genre that students have to write. However, how argumentation is realised in disciplinary writing is often poorly understood by academic tutors, and therefore not adequately taught to students. This paper presents research into undergraduate students' concepts of argument…

Negotiation as a form of persuasion: arguments in first offers.

Science.gov (United States)

Maaravi, Yossi; Ganzach, Yoav; Pazy, Asya

2011-08-01

In this article we examined aspects of negotiation within a persuasion framework. Specifically, we investigated how the provision of arguments that justified the first offer in a negotiation affected the behavior of the parties, namely, how it influenced counteroffers and settlement prices. In a series of 4 experiments and 2 pilot studies, we demonstrated that when the generation of counterarguments was easy, negotiators who did not add arguments to their first offers achieved superior results compared with negotiators who used arguments to justify their first offer. We hypothesized and provided evidence that adding arguments to a first offer was likely to cause the responding party to search for counterarguments, and this, in turn, led him or her to present counteroffers that were further away from the first offer.

Interaction patterns in crisis negotiations: persuasive arguments and cultural differences.

Science.gov (United States)

Giebels, Ellen; Taylor, Paul J

2009-01-01

This research examines cultural differences in negotiators' responses to persuasive arguments in crisis (hostage) negotiations over time. Using a new method of examining cue-response patterns, the authors examined 25 crisis negotiations in which police negotiators interacted with perpetrators from low-context (LC) or high-context (HC) cultures. Compared with HC perpetrators, LC perpetrators were found to use more persuasive arguments, to reciprocate persuasive arguments in the second half of negotiations, and to respond to persuasive arguments in a compromising way. Further analyses found that LC perpetrators were more likely to communicate threats, especially in the first half of the negotiations, but that HC perpetrators were more likely to reciprocate them. The implications of these findings for our understanding of intercultural interaction are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2009 APA, all rights reserved).

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.

Mentoring and Argumentation in a Game-Infused Science Curriculum

Science.gov (United States)

Gould, Deena L.; Parekh, Priyanka

2018-04-01

Engaging in argumentation from evidence is challenging for most middle school students. We report the design of a media-based mentoring system to support middle school students in engaging in argumentation in the context of a game-infused science curriculum. Our design emphasizes learners apprenticing with college student mentors around the socio-scientific inquiry of a designed video game. We report the results of a mixed-methods study examining the use of this media-based mentoring system with students ages 11 through 14. We observed that the discourse of groups of students that engaged with the game-infused science curriculum while interacting with college student mentors via a social media platform demonstrated statistically significant higher ratings of cognitive, epistemic, and social aspects of argumentation than groups of students that engaged with the social media platform and game-infused science curriculum without mentors. We further explored the differences between the Discourses of the mentored and non-mentored groups. This analysis showed that students in the mentored groups were invited, guided, and socialized into roles of greater agency than students in the non-mentored groups. This increased agency might explain why mentored groups demonstrated higher levels of scientific argumentation than non-mentored groups. Based on our analyses, we argue that media-based mentoring may be designed around a video game to support middle school students in engaging in argumentation from evidence.

Les visées de l’argumentation et leurs corrélats langagiers : une approche discursive The Aims of Argumentation and their Linguistic Correlates: A Discursive Approach

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Raphaël Micheli

2012-10-01

Full Text Available Le présent article a pour objectif de contribuer au débat théorique et méthodologique portant sur la définition qu’il convient d’octroyer à la notion d’« argumentation » et sur les conditions qui président à l’observabilité des processus argumentatifs dans les discours. On tente de montrer comment une approche discursive peut traiter deux problèmes souvent débattus dans le champ des études argumentatives. (1 Peut-on, sur le plan pragmatique, identifier une (ou plusieurs visée(s permettant de saisir ce que l’argumentation, en tant que « fait de discours », a de spécifique par rapport à d’autres faits de discours ? (2 Peut-on corréler les visées identifiées sur le plan pragmatique avec des formes relativement stables qui assurent le caractère « reconnaissable » de l’argumentation dans la matérialité langagière ? C’est ainsi la double question des visées de l’argumentation et de leurs corrélats langagiers qui est au centre du propos : l’enjeu est de formuler une série de propositions méthodologiques, en discutant quelques contributions récentes qui ont marqué l’approche discursive de l’argumentation dans l’espace francophone.This paper aims at contributing to the theoretical and methodological debate bearing on the definition of “argumentation” and the observation of argumentative processes in linguistic data. It shows how a discursiveapproach can deal with two issues that are often discussed in the field of argumentation studies. (1 On a pragmatic level, is it possible to identify one (or several aim(s allowing to understand what is specific to the verbal activity of argumentation, as opposed to other verbal activities? (2 Is it possible to correlate such pragmatic aims with forms, so as to account for argumentation in the materiality of language? The paper thus deals both with the aims of argumentation, and with their linguistic correlates: its objective is to put forward a

Training verb argument structure production in agrammatic aphasia: Behavioral and neural recovery patterns

Science.gov (United States)

Thompson, Cynthia K.; Riley, Ellyn A.; den Ouden, Dirk-Bart; Meltzer-Asscher, Aya; Lukic, Sladjana

2013-01-01

Introduction Neuroimaging and lesion studies indicate a left hemisphere network for verb and verb argument structure processing, involving both frontal and temporoparietal brain regions. Although their verb comprehension is generally unimpaired, it is well known that individuals with agrammatic aphasia often present with verb production deficits, characterized by an argument structure complexity hierarchy, indicating faulty access to argument structure representations for production and integration into syntactic contexts. Recovery of verb processing in agrammatism, however, has received little attention and no studies have examined the neural mechanisms associated with improved verb and argument structure processing. In the present study we trained agrammatic individuals on verbs with complex argument structure in sentence contexts and examined generalization to verbs with less complex argument structure. The neural substrates of improved verb production were examined using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). Methods Eight individuals with chronic agrammatic aphasia participated in the study (four experimental and four control participants). Production of three-argument verbs in active sentences was trained using a sentence generation task emphasizing the verb’s argument structure and the thematic roles of sentential noun phrases. Before and after training, production of trained and untrained verbs was tested in naming and sentence production and fMRI scans were obtained, using an action naming task. Results Significant pre- to post-training improvement in trained and untrained (one- and two-argument) verbs was found for treated, but not control, participants, with between-group differences found for verb naming, production of verbs in sentences, and production of argument structure. fMRI activation derived from post-treatment compared to pre-treatment scans revealed upregulation in cortical regions implicated for verb and argument structure processing

Function and Argument in Begriffsschrift

Czech Academy of Sciences Publication Activity Database

Badesa, C.; Bertran-San Millán, Joan

2017-01-01

Roč. 38, č. 4 (2017), s. 316-341 ISSN 0144-5340 Institutional support: RVO:67985955 Keywords : identity * Frege * logic * function * argument Subject RIV: AA - Philosophy ; Religion OBOR OECD: Philosophy, History and Philosophy of science and technology Impact factor: 0.286, year: 2016

A Davidsonian Argument Against Incommensurability

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Douven, I.; de Regt, H.W.

2002-01-01

The writings of Kuhn and Feyerabend on incommensurability challenged the idea that science progresses towards the truth. Davidson famously criticized the notion of incommensurability, arguing that it is incoherent. Davidson's argument was in turn criticized by Kuhn and others. This article argues

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.

Early Experiences with Family Conflict: Implications for Arguments with a Close Friend.

Science.gov (United States)

Herrera, Carla; Dunn, Judy

1997-01-01

Examined associations between children's early experiences in family disputes and later conflict management with close friends. Found that argument used by mothers and siblings that considered children's needs was positively associated with children's later constructive argument and resolution techniques. Mothers' use of argument predicted…

Reinterpreting arguments in dialogue : an application to evidential reasoning

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Bex, F.J.; Prakken, H.; Gordon, T.F.

2004-01-01

This paper presents a formalisation of two typical legal dialogue moves in a formal dialogue game for argumentation. The moves concern two ways of reinterpreting a general rule used in an argument, viz. by 'unpacking' and 'refining' the rule. The moves can be made not only by the user but also by

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…

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.

Error Argumentation Enhance Adaptability in Adults With Low Motor Ability.

Science.gov (United States)

Lee, Chi-Mei; Bo, Jin

2016-01-01

The authors focused on young adults with varying degrees of motor difficulties and examined their adaptability in a visuomotor adaptation task where the visual feedback of participants' movement error was presented with either 1:1 ratio (i.e., regular feedback schedule) or 1:2 ratio (i.e., enhanced feedback schedule). Within-subject design was used with two feedback schedules counter-balanced and separated for 10 days. Results revealed that participants with greater motor difficulties showed less adaptability than those with normal motor abilities in the regular feedback schedule; however, all participants demonstrated similar level of adaptability in the enhanced feedback schedule. The results suggest that error argumentation enhances adaptability in adults with low motor ability.

[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

Teaching the Academic Argument in a University EFL Environment

Science.gov (United States)

Bacha, Nahla Nola

2010-01-01

An educational challenge that many university EFL students face is the production of written academic arguments as part of their required essays. Although the importance of argumentative writing in education is uncontested, and research shows that EFL students find difficulties in producing such texts, it is not adequately dealt with for the L1…

Rethinking Volks V Robinson: The Implications of Applying a ...

African Journals Online (AJOL)

Rethinking Volks V Robinson: The Implications of Applying a "Contextaulised Choice Model" to Prospective South African Domestic Partnerships Legislation. ... is enacted. Keywords: Life partnership; domestic partnership; Domestic Partnerships Bill; choice argument; contextualised choice model; reciprocal duty of support.

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...

Putting the Pieces Together: Online Argumentation Vee Diagrams Enhance Thinking during Discussions

Science.gov (United States)

Nussbaum, E. Michael; Winsor, Denise L.; Aqui, Yvette M.; Poliquin, Anne M.

2007-01-01

We examine the effect of online Argumentation Vee Diagrams (AVDs) on the quality of students' argumentation during asynchronous, online discussions. With AVDs, students develop arguments on both sides of a controversial issue and then develop an integrated, overall final conclusion. In this study, students used AVDs individually before composing…

Argumentative processes on a opinion article of the Portuguese Language Olympics

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Gilton Sampaio de Souza

2017-09-01

Full Text Available This study aims to analyze the different types of arguments, considering them central parts of argumentative processes, in opinion articles of the Portuguese Language Olympiad written on the topic “Where I live.” To analyze the arguments in the selected articles we adopted the assumptions of the New Rhetoric (PERELMAN; OLBRECHTS-TYTECA, 2005, associated with the studies of Bakhtin (2003, 2010 and of Souza (2003, 2008, 2009, among others. We selected five articles awarded in different competitions (2008, 2010, 2012, which are in public domain, available on the official site of the Olympics. Most of the articles have their theses made by the arguments that support the actual structure, highlighting the relations of cause/effect and fact/consequence. Based on the established connection between the facts, speakers/ writers seek to understand these relationships and at the same time, explain and justify arguments and controversies involving issues related to their experience in the community.

Argupolis: a doctoral program on argumentation practices in different contexts

NARCIS (Netherlands)

van Eemeren, F.H.; Greco Morasso, S.; Grossen, M.; Perret-Clermont, A.-N.; Rigotti, E.

2009-01-01

Argumentation is a form of communicative interaction by means of which social realities - institutions, groups and relationships - are construed and managed. People develop argumentation in numerous purposeful activities: to make sound and well-thought decisions, to critically found their opinions,

The Integration of Vocabulary and Effective Sentence Mastery towards Students’ Argumentative Writing Skills

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Tien Rafida

2017-06-01

Full Text Available The aims of this result to reveal the integrated of vocabulary and effective sentence mastery against the argumentation writing skill students’ PBI-SU FITK UIN the hypothesis proposed in this results are : (1 vocabulary mastery contribute to the argument to the arguments writing skill of students; (2 effective sentence mastery contribute to the argument writing skill of student; (3 vocabulary mastery and effective sentence mastery together contribute to the argument writing skill of students. This result uses a quantitative approach. The population in this study is PBI UIN-SU as many as 6 classes. As for the samples in this result are students of class II. By using cluster random sampling, obtained a sample of 140 students. The instrument used is a test. These results indicate that: (1 vocabulary mastery contributed positively and significantly to the argument essay writing skills of students. The amount of contribution is 18.4%; (2 Effective sentence mastery contribute positively and significantly to the argument essay writing skills of students. The amount of contribution is 11.7%; (3 mastery of vocabulary and mastery of effective sentences together contributed positively and significantly to the argument essay writing skills of students. The major contribution is 26.5%; (4 mastering vocabulary to effectively contribute by 16.39% against the argument essay writing skills of students; (5 Mastery effective sentence effectively contribute 13.11% against the argument essay writing skills of students. Based on the results of this study, it was concluded that the vocabulary and mastery of effective sentences are the two factors that influence the argument essay writing skills of students in addition to other factors. Therefore, the researchers suggest to all parties concerned to pay more attention to these two factors so that students' skills in essay writing can be further improved.

Teaching science as argument: Prospective elementary teachers' knowledge

Science.gov (United States)

Barreto-Espino, Reizelie

For the past two decades there has been increasing emphasis on argumentation in school science. In 2007, the National Research Council published a synthesis report that emphasizes the centrality of constructing, evaluating, and using scientific explanations. Participating in argumentation is seen as fundamental to children's science learning experiences. These new expectations increase challenges for elementary teachers since their understanding of and experiences with science are overwhelmingly inconsistent with teaching science as argument. These challenges are further amplified when dealing with prospective elementary teachers. The current study was guided by the following research questions: (1) What are the ways in which preservice elementary teachers appropriate components of "teaching science as argument" during their student teaching experience? (2) To what extent do components from prospective elementary teachers' reflections influence planning for science teaching? (3) What elements from the context influence preservice elementary teachers' attention to teaching science as argument? This study followed a multi-participant case study approach and analyses were informed by grounded theory. Three participants were selected from a larger cohort of prospective elementary teachers enrolled in an innovative Elementary Professional Development School (PDS) partnership at a large Northeast University. Cross-case analysis allowed for the development of five key assertions: (1) The presence of opportunities for interacting with phenomena and collecting first hand data helped participants increase their emphasis on evidence-based explanations. (2) Participants viewed science talks as an essential mechanism for engaging students in the construction of evidence-based explanations and as being fundamental to meaning-making. (3) Participants demonstrated attention to scientific subject matter during instruction rather than merely focusing on activities and/or inquiry

Sustainable Development: Ten Arguments Against a Biologistic "Slow-Down" Philosophy of Social and Economic Development

OpenAIRE

Heilig, G.K.

1997-01-01

This paper is a provocative collection of arguments that came to the author's mind when reading through some of the literature on sustainable development. Similar to rather general sociological theories, these sustainability concepts - which are rooted in biological observations and theories of non-human biosphere - describe elements of a universal development philosophy. But they fail to take into account some of the most basic characteristics of how human societies and economics function a...

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

Does Rhetoric Have a Place in Wohlrapp’s Theory of Argument?

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Katharina Stevens

2017-09-01

Full Text Available When a new theory of argumentation becomes available on the English-speaking market, such as it is happening now through the translation of Harald Wohlrapp’s The Concept of Argument, it is always interesting to work out how the new input will interact with the work that has otherwise been done in the field. (Wohlrapp, 2014 This comment aims to determine whether rhetoric has a place in Wohlrapp’s account of argumentation.

The shortest argument for the existence of God in Islamic philosophy

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Halilović Seid

2014-01-01

Full Text Available The first cognitive frameworks of the undoubtedly most famous argument for the existence of God in Islamic philosophy were set by the notable Ibn Sina. Having proved the existence of God by considering existence itself, in his famous philosophical book al-Isharat he wrote that in that way he offered the 'argument of the veracious'. In the following stages of the development of this argument this syntagm will become one of the most popular scientific names in the history of philosophical and rational thought in Muslims. Numerous representatives of various schools of philosophy, dogmatic theology and doctrinal gnosis in Islam thoroughly analyzed the text of this part of the al-Isharat book and sometimes formulated new versions of the 'argument of the veracious'. In this paper we will focus on the basic cognitive milestones in the development of this argument and with a view to acquiring this we will use the method of detailed content analysis of the works of those Muslim philosophers who contributed significantly to that intellectual process. Given that scientific destiny of the 'argument of the veracious' quite attractively illustrates the various stages of the development of entire Islamic philosophy, we will try to show that in each new period Islamic philosophical heritage grew a more vital and dominant scientific discipline. On the other hand, we will conclude that throughout history Islamic philosophy and 'arguments of the veracious' have become more reminiscent of subtle intuition of Muslim gnostics and innermost spheres of the original understanding of the sacred Islamic texts and traditions.

Argumentation and Multi-Agent Decision Making

OpenAIRE

Parsons, S.; Jennings, N. R.

1998-01-01

This paper summarises our on-going work on mixed- initiative decision making which extends both classical decision theory and a symbolic theory of decision making based on argumentation to a multi-agent domain.

Eight Arguments against Double Effect

DEFF Research Database (Denmark)

Di Nucci, Ezio

I offer eight arguments against the Doctrine of Double Effect, a normative principle according to which in pursuing the good it is sometimes morally permissible to bring about some evil as a side-effect or merely foreseen consequence: the same evil would not be morally justified as an intended...

Multiple languages and mathematics in the process of argumentation in a physics class: Analysis of data from an Inquiry Laboratory

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Alex Bellucco do Carmo

2012-05-01

Full Text Available We analyzed within the framework of Stephen Toulmin (2006, the process of argument started by a teacher, to build the mathematical language as a way of interpreting data from an inquiry lab about heating water. The activity was part of a inquiry teaching class that was applied in the first year of high school, at a public school in the State of São Paulo. The cooperative use of several languages was important to strengthen the various elements of the argument, while the mathematical languages such as graphical and algebraic had the role of guarantees and refuted the conclusions, giving strength to the latter.

The changing of oral argumentation process of grade XI students through Socratic dialogue

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

I W Pangestika

2017-12-01

Full Text Available Arguments are one of the important purposes in the modern era of learning because it is the basic step to promote student’s critical thinking process and science literacy. Argumentation process can be trained through interactive dialogue that provides opportunities for students to argue. This research aims to change oral argumentation process in biology class of high school through the application of the Socratic Dialogue. The participants were students of grade XI science in one high school located in Surakarta, selected purposively. A classroom action research was done collaboratively between student teacher, lecturers, and teacher, follow the spiral cycles of research by Stephen Kemmis. During the implementation of research, the audio recorder has prepared to record the dialogue and arguments of the students. Next, data recorded that was converted to a dialogue transcript analyzed qualitatively using the Toulmin Argumentation Patterns (TAP. Another data source is teacher’s reflective diaries that contained notes during the learning process. The result shows that student’s oral argumentation process found were only claiming supported by weak warrants. Implementation of the Socratic Dialogue brings positive changes in oral argumentation process of the students, proven by the complete argumentation pattern include claims, data, warrants, backings, and rebuttals at the end of the research cycle. A classroom action research which is developed collaboratively and implement interactive dialogue also inquiry learning is highly recommended to change student’s oral argumentation process.

Towards evidence-based critical thinking medicine? Uses of best evidence in flawless argumentations.

Science.gov (United States)

Jenicek, Milos

2006-08-01

Uses of informal logic and critical thinking methodology are increasingly taught, learnt and advantageously applied in such diverse domains as law, the military, business, and education. Health sciences are also following this trend. However, production and critical appraisal of evidence as already practiced in Evidence-Based Medicine must be coupled with equally rigorous uses in order to ensure appropriate health problem understanding and decision-making. Making most proposals and decisions in medicine is the conclusion of an argumentation process that lies behind any communication between health professionals working with patients, performing research or sharing ideas about health problems, their interpretations and solutions with numerous stakeholders in public life. Modern critical thinking and decision making in medicine is not instantly mastered, but is instead a learnt experience as anything else in professional and social interactions. The modern argument as outlined, illustrated and applied to health problems in this essay is an extension of a previously established way of thinking in Evidence-Based Medicine. Ideally, health professionals, their patients and all other stakeholders should speak the same language and it is up to us to make this possible. Evidence and critical thinking - based medicine might be a solution. As modern critical thinkers, we are at the forefront and we must see to it that patients and professional and general communities benefit from this more so even than from other remarkable historical and current contributions to the well-being of those under our care.

A LIBRARIAN’S ARGUMENT

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Brigita Miloš

2013-01-01

Full Text Available Cognitive linguistics/stylistics enable specific insights into the sex / gender identity issues, primarily by their basic theoretical postulate – mind embodiment. The aim of this paper is to analyze how the concept of rape functions in one particular statement/argument. Noted controversies and disputes, stemming from critical reading, also function as a version of ‘other’ embodied understandings of the term in question – rape.

Discounting future health benefits: the poverty of consistency arguments.

Science.gov (United States)

Nord, Erik

2011-01-01

In economic evaluation of health care, main stream practice is to discount benefits at the same rate as costs. But main papers in which this practice is advocated have missed a distinction between two quite different evaluation problems: (1) How much does the time of program occurrence matter for value and (2) how much do delays in health benefits from programs implemented at a given time matter? The papers have furthermore focused on logical and arithmetic arguments rather than on real value considerations. These 'consistency arguments' are at best trivial, at worst logically flawed. At the end of the day, there is a sensible argument for equal discounting of costs and benefits rooted in microeconomic theory of rational, utility maximising consumers' saving behaviour. But even this argument is problematic, first because the model is not clearly supported by empirical observations of individuals' time preferences for health, second because it relates only to evaluation in terms of overall individual utility. It does not provide grounds for claiming that decision makers with a wider societal perspective, which may include concerns for fair distribution, need to discount Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Analysis of an epigenetic argument against human reproductive cloning.

Science.gov (United States)

Nordgren, Anders

2006-08-01

Human reproductive cloning is a much disputed ethical issue. This technology is often condemned as being contrary to human dignity. However, there are also risk arguments. An ethical argument that is often put forward by scientists but seldom developed in more detail focuses on health risks in animal cloning. There is a high risk that animal clones exhibit abnormalities and these are increasingly believed to be due to errors in epigenetic reprogramming. The argument is that human reproductive cloning should not be carried out because human clones are also likely to exhibit abnormalities due to inappropriate epigenetic reprogramming. Different versions of this epigenetic argument are analysed, a categorical version and a non-categorical. The non-categorical version is suggested to be more well-considered. With regard to policy making on human reproductive cloning, the categorical version can be used to prescribe a permanent ban, while the non-categorical version can be used to prescribe a temporary ban. The implications of the precautionary principle--as interpreted in the European Union--are investigated. The conclusion is that it seems possible to support a temporary ban by reference to this principle.

Semantic types of some generic relation arguments: Detection and evaluation

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Katrenko, S.; Adriaans, P.

2008-01-01

This paper presents an approach to detection of the semantic types of relation arguments employing the WordNet hierarchy. Using the SemEval-2007 data, we show that the method allows to generalize relation arguments with high precision for such generic relations as Origin-Entity, Content-Container,

Analogy and Intersubjectivity: Political Oratory, Scholarly Argument and Scientific Reports.

Science.gov (United States)

Gross, Alan G.

1983-01-01

Focuses on the different ways political oratory, scholarly argument, and scientific reports use analogy. Specifically, analyzes intersubjective agreement in Franklin D. Roosevelt's First Inaugural address, the scholarly argument between Sir Karl Popper and Thomas S. Kuhn, and the scientific reports of various mathematicians and scientists. (PD)

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.

Big Argumentation?

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Daniel Faltesek

2013-08-01

Full Text Available Big Data is nothing new. Public concern regarding the mass diffusion of data has appeared repeatedly with computing innovations, in the formation before Big Data it was most recently referred to as the information explosion. In this essay, I argue that the appeal of Big Data is not a function of computational power, but of a synergistic relationship between aesthetic order and a politics evacuated of a meaningful public deliberation. Understanding, and challenging, Big Data requires an attention to the aesthetics of data visualization and the ways in which those aesthetics would seem to depoliticize information. The conclusion proposes an alternative argumentative aesthetic as the appropriate response to the depoliticization posed by the popular imaginary of Big Data.

Advancing Competencies in Argumentation at Schools using the Example of "Culture-Environment Interaction"

Science.gov (United States)

Budke, A.; Schaebitz, F.; Dittrich, S.

2016-12-01

According to the German national education standards communication is one of the six areas in which competencies shall be conveyed in Geography classes. Special significance is given to the training of the competence to solve problems through argumentation. Argumentation has a great significance in the learning process in schools, because here the students' knowledge pools are individually linked and understood. According to modern theories of learning, learning is a constructive process. Linking existing pools of knowledge to new insights is usually triggered by communication and argumentation in the classroom. Furthermore, argumentation helps with the individual's formation of opinion as well as their identification with certain values. Argumentation is one of the central social and cultural techniques to solve conflicts peacefully, to conduct negotiations, and to act in one's own interests. Thus conveying competence in argumentation is to be seen as an interdisciplinary task in education. Recently a hypothetical model of competence in geographical argumentation was proposed, a methodical instrument for measuring competence in geographical argumentation was developed, and by analyzing textbooks it was shown that this topic is only marginally targeted by exercises. The Collaborative Research Center 806 "Our Way to Europe" (www.sfb806.uni-koeln.de), with its cross disciplinary research in the sciences as well as humanities offers an outstanding basis for developing and evaluating teaching material and concepts. The use of these diverse topics, complex systems, and the various research problems as well as findings of the CRC-806 allowed developing study units designed to promote problem solving and argumentation skills in the sciences and humanities. Here we will present the results of this study based on special teaching materials, which was tested and evaluated to support students in formulating scientific problems and promote their argumentation skills.

When technologies makes good people do bad things: another argument against the value-neutrality of technologies.

Science.gov (United States)

Morrow, David R

2014-06-01

Although many scientists and engineers insist that technologies are value-neutral, philosophers of technology have long argued that they are wrong. In this paper, I introduce a new argument against the claim that technologies are value-neutral. This argument complements and extends, rather than replaces, existing arguments against value-neutrality. I formulate the Value-Neutrality Thesis, roughly, as the claim that a technological innovation can have bad effects, on balance, only if its users have "vicious" or condemnable preferences. After sketching a microeconomic model for explaining or predicting a technology's impact on individuals' behavior, I argue that a particular technological innovation can create or exacerbate collective action problems, even in the absence of vicious preferences. Technologies do this by increasing the net utility of refusing to cooperate. I also argue that a particular technological innovation can induce short-sighted behavior because of humans' tendency to discount future benefits too steeply. I suggest some possible extensions of my microeconomic model of technological impacts. These extensions would enable philosophers of technology to consider agents with mixed motives-i.e., agents who harbor some vicious preferences but also some aversion to acting on them-and to apply the model to questions about the professional responsibilities of engineers, scientists, and other inventors.

Feminist Responses to Rogerian Argument.

Science.gov (United States)

Lassner, Phyllis

1990-01-01

Discusses a course in which female students were instructed to compose argumentative compositions in the empathic style of Carl Rogers. Reports that students disliked the style, believing it pretended to accept minority opinions while making women feel as if they had to change their views to belong to the majority culture. (SG)

Tracing the Rationale Behind UML Model Change Through Argumentation

Science.gov (United States)

Jureta, Ivan J.; Faulkner, Stéphane

Neglecting traceability—i.e., the ability to describe and follow the life of a requirement—is known to entail misunderstanding and miscommunication, leading to the engineering of poor quality systems. Following the simple principles that (a) changes to UML model instances ought be justified to the stakeholders, (b) justification should proceed in a structured manner to ensure rigor in discussions, critique, and revisions of model instances, and (c) the concept of argument instantiated in a justification process ought to be well defined and understood, the present paper introduces the UML Traceability through Argumentation Method (UML-TAM) to enable the traceability of design rationale in UML while allowing the appropriateness of model changes to be checked by analysis of the structure of the arguments provided to justify such changes.

Analogical Arguments in Ethics and Law: A Defence of Deductivism

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Fábio Perin Shecaira

2013-09-01

Full Text Available The paper provides a qualified defence of Bruce Waller’s deductivist schema for a priori analogical arguments in ethics and law. One crucial qualification is that the schema represents analogical arguments as complexes composed of one deductive inference (hence “deductivism” but also of one non-deductive subargument. Another important qualification is that the schema is informed by normative assumptions regarding the conditions that an analogical argument must satisfy in order for it to count as an optimal instance of its kind. Waller’s schema (in qualified form is defended from criticisms formulated by Trudy Govier, Marcello Guarini and Lilian Bermejo-Luque.

The adventures of climate science in the sweet land of idle arguments

Science.gov (United States)

Winsberg, Eric; Goodwin, William Mark

2016-05-01

In a recent series of papers Roman Frigg, Leonard Smith, and several coauthors have developed a general epistemological argument designed to cast doubt on the capacity of a broad range of mathematical models to generate "decision relevant predictions." The presumptive targets of their argument are at least some of the modeling projects undertaken in contemporary climate science. In this paper, we trace and contrast two very different readings of the scope of their argument. We do this by considering the very different implications for climate science that these interpretations would have. Then, we lay out the structure of their argument-an argument by analogy-with an eye to identifying points at which certain epistemically significant distinctions might limit the force of the analogy. Finally, some of these epistemically significant distinctions are introduced and defended as relevant to a great many of the predictive mathematical modeling projects employed in contemporary climate science.

Guidelines for writing an argumentative essay

OpenAIRE

Aleksandra Egurnova

2014-01-01

The guidelines below are intended for teachers, professors, students, and the public at large who are interested in the issues of English writing culture. They provide a detailed plan for completing the writing task–writing an argumentative essay.

A nonlinear interface model applied to masonry structures

Science.gov (United States)

Lebon, Frédéric; Raffa, Maria Letizia; Rizzoni, Raffaella

2015-12-01

In this paper, a new imperfect interface model is presented. The model includes finite strains, micro-cracks and smooth roughness. The model is consistently derived by coupling a homogenization approach for micro-cracked media and arguments of asymptotic analysis. The model is applied to brick/mortar interfaces. Numerical results are presented.

The Types of Argument Structure Used by Hillary Clinton in the CNN Democratic Presidential Debate

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Anggie Angeline

2009-01-01

Full Text Available This qualitative research was conducted to examine the types of argument structure by Hillary Clinton in part one of the CNN Democratic Presidential Debate since Hillary, who had a great deal of experiences in political parties, was supposed to be able to construct convincing arguments that had good argument structures. The theories used to analyze were Bierman and Assali’s (1996, King’s (n.d. and Stanlick’s (2003. The findings showed that there were five types of argument structure used: serial, linked, convergent, divergent, and hybrid argument structures. The linked argument structure was the argument structure used the most frequently in Hillary’s utterances in the debate, while the divergent was the least one. Thus, it could be concluded that Hillary’s speech in the Presidential Debate was quite interesting since she could combine all the five types of argument structure, though the frequency of using them was not the same and it seems that linked argument structure was the most effective strategy for her in arguing about the politic, economy, and social issues.

Oral genres, argumentation and teaching

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Zilda G. O. Aquino

2015-02-01

Full Text Available This paper aims at dealing with issues related to language spoken in the classroom, focusing on discursive practices that highlight argumentation. We believe that the discussions that were made around genres, especially guided by the studies of Bakhtin and Text Linguistics, have been providing a breakthrough towards the necessity for the school to promote language teaching through the discursive genre approach. That is what we expect to be happening since both writing and spoken modalities deserve space in learning. We believe that oral genres demand that teachers acquire specific knowledge of the features of spoken language interaction that arise from its use in practical situations. Because these studies are recent among our researchers (not longer than three decades, they should still be very present in our discussions. In this paper, we focus on a specific genre of oral tradition – the debate. It is ideal for knowledge building and taking a stand at issues that arise in society, all of which is particularly important to the school. Besides contributing to the development of skills required by certain sociodiscursive practices, it is proposed that the teaching of argumentation in oral genres concentrate on the observation of selected strategies in interactions. We are particularly interested in interactions that emerge when one interaction party is trying to persuade the other. The corpus consists of the transcriptions of debates which occurred both in the classroom and in other contexts, such as the media. The methodological approach is done by identifying the arguments and their strategic use in specific situations. The theoretical discussion rests on the works of Orecchioni (2010, Marcuschi (2004, Dolz and Schneuwly (2004, Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca (1996 [1958], among others.

Semantic types of some generic relation arguments: Detection and evaluation

OpenAIRE

Katrenko, S.; Adriaans, P.

2008-01-01

This paper presents an approach to detection of the semantic types of relation arguments employing the WordNet hierarchy. Using the SemEval-2007 data, we show that the method allows to generalize relation arguments with high precision for such generic relations as Origin-Entity, Content-Container, Instrument-Agency and some other.

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.

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.

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…

Argument Graph as a Tool for Promoting Collaborative Online Reading

Science.gov (United States)

Kiili, Carita

2013-01-01

This study explored how the construction of an argument graph promotes students' collaborative online reading compared to note-taking. Upper secondary school students ("n"?=?76) worked in pairs. The pairs were asked to search for and read source material on the Web for a joint essay and either construct an argument graph or take notes…

Argument-Counterargument Structure in Indonesian EFL Learners' English Argumentative Essays: A Dialogic Concept of Writing

Science.gov (United States)

Rusfandi

2015-01-01

This study investigates the potential use of the argument-counterargument structure in English L2 essays written by Indonesian EFL learners. It examines whether L2 proficiency affects the use of opposing views in their essays, and measures whether there is a correlation between the use of the rhetorical structure and the participants' overall…

Discounting Testimony with the Argument Ad Hominem and a Bayesian Congruent Prior Model

Science.gov (United States)

Bhatia, Jaydeep-Singh; Oaksford, Mike

2015-01-01

When directed to ignore evidence of a witness's previous bad character because of a violation of the rules of evidence, are jurors' beliefs still affected? The intuition is that they will be because in everyday argumentation, fallacies, like the ad hominem, are effective argumentative strategies. An ad hominem argument (against the person)…

When Arguments and Sounds of Words Begin to Speak - About Learning rhetorics

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Tatjana Zidar

1995-12-01

Full Text Available There has been a growing awareness as to the need of knowledge to improvc public speaking and interpersonal communication. When limiting our consideration to two essential elements contributing to efficient public speakiog, i.e. the strength of argumcntation and voice modulation of the text, one becomes aware of how important argumentation is. It is necessary for a speaker to fonn efficient arguments by taking into account his or her ethical features. Further, there are at least five types of argumentation (deduction, induction, analogous, causative and referential concluding. There is a need, on the other hand, to avoid sly and dishonest argumentation (evasion, dangerous speculations, ... etc.. Nevertheless, the argumentation alone does not suffice. Speakers should develop a feeling enabling them to teli when the speech is good, i e. how to catch attention of the audience, how to conclude efficiently, how to be dramatic, how to order arguments, what language to use. To this purpose three basic elements of persuasion are used: etos, patos and logos. Other elements can help forwarding the message, such as: intonation, language register, colour and intensity of speech, tempo and pronunciation. To enhance public speaking the content and the speech form are to be linked.

Using History and Philosophy of Science to Promote Students' Argumentation

Science.gov (United States)

Archila, Pablo Antonio

2015-01-01

This article describes the effect of a teaching-learning sequence (TLS) based on the discovery of oxygen in promoting students' argumentation. It examines the written and oral arguments produced by 63 high school students (24 females and 39 males, 16-17 years old) in France during a complete TLS supervised by the same teacher. The data used in…

Swiss residents' arguments for and against a career in medicine.

Science.gov (United States)

Buddeberg-Fischer, Barbara; Dietz, Claudia; Klaghofer, Richard; Buddeberg, Claus

2006-08-14

In some Western countries, the medical profession is continuously losing prestige, doctors are claiming of high demands, low rewards, and difficult structural working conditions. This study aimed to investigate the arguments given by Swiss residents for and against a career in medicine. As part of a prospective cohort study of Swiss medical school graduates on career development, 567 fourth-year residents were asked to answer the free-response item of what arguments there still were in favour of or against a career in medicine. They also indicated whether they would choose the medical profession all over again (yes/no). The statements were transcribed, content categories inductively formulated, and their descriptions written down in a code manual. Arguments were encoded according to the code manual and assigned to eight content categories (Mayring's content analysis). Frequency distributions were given for categories and tested with Chi2-tests for differences in gender, speciality fields, and whether or not the respondent would again choose a career in medicine. The 567 participants made 1,640 statements in favour of and 1,703 statements against a career in medicine. The content analysis of the residents' answers yielded eight categories with arguments both for and against a career in medicine. Of all "statements for" responses, 70% fell into the two top-ranking categories of Personal experiences in day-to-day working life (41.2%) and Interpersonal experiences in professional relationships (28.8%). The top-ranking category of the "statements against" arguments was General work-related structural conditions (32%), followed by Social prestige and health-policy aspects (21%). Main arguments in favour of a career in medicine were interdisciplinary challenge, combination of basic sciences and interpersonal concerns, helping suffering people, guarantee of a secure job; arguments against comprised high workload, time pressure, emotional stress, poorly structured

Swiss residents' arguments for and against a career in medicine

Science.gov (United States)

Buddeberg-Fischer, Barbara; Dietz, Claudia; Klaghofer, Richard; Buddeberg, Claus

2006-01-01

Background In some Western countries, the medical profession is continuously losing prestige, doctors are claiming of high demands, low rewards, and difficult structural working conditions. This study aimed to investigate the arguments given by Swiss residents for and against a career in medicine. Methods As part of a prospective cohort study of Swiss medical school graduates on career development, 567 fourth-year residents were asked to answer the free-response item of what arguments there still were in favour of or against a career in medicine. They also indicated whether they would choose the medical profession all over again (yes/no). The statements were transcribed, content categories inductively formulated, and their descriptions written down in a code manual. Arguments were encoded according to the code manual and assigned to eight content categories (Mayring's content analysis). Frequency distributions were given for categories and tested with Chi2-tests for differences in gender, speciality fields, and whether or not the respondent would again choose a career in medicine. Results The 567 participants made 1,640 statements in favour of and 1,703 statements against a career in medicine. The content analysis of the residents' answers yielded eight categories with arguments both for and against a career in medicine. Of all "statements for" responses, 70% fell into the two top-ranking categories of Personal experiences in day-to-day working life (41.2%) and Interpersonal experiences in professional relationships (28.8%). The top-ranking category of the "statements against" arguments was General work-related structural conditions (32%), followed by Social prestige and health-policy aspects (21%). Main arguments in favour of a career in medicine were interdisciplinary challenge, combination of basic sciences and interpersonal concerns, helping suffering people, guarantee of a secure job; arguments against comprised high workload, time pressure, emotional stress

TV Fights: Women and Men in Interpersonal Arguments on Prime-Time Television Dramas.

Science.gov (United States)

Brinson, Susan L.

1992-01-01

Studies the behaviors of women and men represented in interpersonal arguments in prime-time television dramas. Finds a weak link between actual argument behaviors and those on television, thereby socializing viewers in a manner inconsistent with reality. Suggests that television arguments are guided more by the needs of the medium that a need to…

Scaffolding norms of argumentation-based inquiry in a primary mathematics classroom

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Makar, Katie; Bakker, Arthur; Ben-Zvi, Dani

2015-01-01

Developing argumentation-based inquiry practices requires teachers and students to be explicit about classroom norms that support these practices. In this study, we asked: How can a teacher scaffold the development of argumentation-based inquiry norms and practices in a mathematics classroom? A

Two Millian Arguments: Using Helen Longino’s Approach to Solve the Problems Philip Kitcher Targeted with His Argument on Freedom of Inquiry

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Jaana Eigi

2012-12-01

Full Text Available Philip Kitcher argued that the freedom to pursue one's version of the good life is the main aim of Mill's argument for freedom of expression. According to Kitcher, in certain scientific fields, political and epistemological asymmetries bias research toward conclusions that threaten this most important freedom of underprivileged groups. Accordingly, Kitcher claimed that there are Millian grounds for limiting freedom of inquiry in these fields to protect the freedom of the underprivileged.I explore Kitcher's argument in light of the interpretation Helen Longino gave to Mill's argument. She argued that free critical dialogue in the community allows bias to be overcome, through intersubjective criticism of hypotheses and the background assumptions that frame them.I suggest that Longino's approach allows for the identification of the fundamental problems of the research programs Kitcher targeted, and for the rejection of their claims to knowledge. Thus it is possible to address Kitcher's problem without limiting freedom of speech.

GSN - The Goal Structuring Notation A Structured Approach to Presenting Arguments

CERN Document Server

Spriggs, John

2012-01-01

Goal Structuring Notation (GSN)  is becoming increasing popular; practitioners use it in the railway, air traffic management and nuclear industries, amongst others.  Originally developed to present safety assurance arguments, GSN need not be restricted to safety assurances only; in principle, you can use it to present (and test) any argument.  Anyone wishing to support, or refute, a claim can use GSN. Written by an experienced practitioner, The Goal Structuring Notation is both for those who wish to prepare and present compelling arguments using the notation, and for those who wish to review such arguments critically and effectively. To emphasise the versatility of this approach The Goal Structuring Notation presents examples and questions based on diverse subject areas including Business Management, Drama, Engineering, Politics and Astrobiology. Simple examples introduce each symbol of the notation before introducing more complex structures which illustrate how the symbols work together in practical scena...

Modal Arguments against Physicalism in View of Scientific Findings Concerning Pain

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Maja Malec

2017-10-01

Full Text Available I analyse Kripke's modal argument against the mind-brain identity theories. Specifically, he argues against the identity between pain and C-fibres simulation by pointing out the difference between this identity claim and the theoretical identifications, such as 'Water is H2O' and 'Lightning is a motion of electric charges'. Kripke's argument relies on the assumption that the experience of pains is a simple and homogenous phenomenon, but scientific research shows that it is in fact a quite complex one. We can distinguish at least three components: sensory-discriminative, motivational-affective and cognitive. This discovery makes it possible to reject Kripke's argument, but it also uncovers a major flaw that is common to all modal arguments against physicalism. They proclaim to answer the fundamental question about the nature of our world by relying on our powers of imagination and without having the relevant factual knowledge.

The effects of online peer feedback and epistemic beliefs on students’ argumentation-based learning

OpenAIRE

Noroozi, Omid; Hatami, Javad

2018-01-01

Although the importance of students’ argumentative peer feedback for learning is undeniable, there is a need for further empirical evidence on whether and how it is related to various aspects of argumentation-based learning namely argumentative essay writing, domain-specific learning, and attitudinal change while considering their epistemic beliefs which are known to be related to argumentation. In this study, a pre-test–post-test design was conducted with 42 higher education students who wer...

Group theoretical arguments on the Landau theory of second-order phase transitions applied to the phase transitions in some liquid crystals

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Rosciszewski, K.

1979-01-01

The phase transitions between liquids and several of the simplest liquid crystalline phases (nematic, cholesteric, and the simplest types of smectic A and smectic C) were studied from the point of view of the group-theoretical arguments of Landau theory. It was shown that the only possible candidates for second-order phase transitions are those between nematic and smectic A, between centrosymmetric nematic and smectic C and between centrosymmetric smectic A and smectic C. Simple types of density functions for liquid crystalline phases are proposed. (author)

Faut-il intégrer l’argumentation dans l’analyse du discours ? Problématiques et enjeux Should Argumentation be Integrated into Discourse Analysis?

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Ruth Amossy

2012-10-01

Full Text Available Cet article justifie la nécessité pour l’analyse du discours d’intégrer pleinement en son sein l’argumentation comme élément constitutif du discours. Une présentation synthétique de la théorie de l’argumentation dans le discours, à la croisée de la Nouvelle Rhétorique et de l’analyse du discours développée en France, montre cependant en quoi elle diffère de la nouvelle version de la Critical Discourse Analysis qui se nourrit de l’approche normative de la pragma-dialectique. En même temps, elle tente de résoudre les tensions théoriques entre les conceptions de l’argumentation inspirées d’Aristote et de Perelman, et les courants de l’analyse du discours qui reposent sur une vision contemporaine du sujet et des contraintes sociales et institutionnelles qui modèlent le discours. La synthèse théorique est suivie d’une exemplification concrète : une micro-analyse d’un post électronique sur le port de la burqa en France. L’article débouche sur une discussion concernant les modalités selon lesquelles l’analyse qui traite des discours sociaux et des problèmes de société autorise ou exclut l’engagement politique ou éthique des chercheurs.This paper accounts for the necessity of integrating argumentation as a constitutive element of discourse into Discourse Analysis. A synthetic presentation of the theory of argumentation in discourse drawing on New Rhetoric and (French Discourse Analysis shows how it differs from the new version of CDA that is derived from a normative approach to argumentation based on pragma-dialectics. It also endeavors to resolve the theoretical tensions between theories of argumentation borrowed from Aristotle, and trends of Discourse Analysis that rely on contemporary conceptions of the subject and on the social constraints imposed upon discourse. The theoretical synthesis is followed by a concrete exemplification – the micro-analysis of a polemical poston the burqa in

Functional Parallel Factor Analysis for Functions of One- and Two-dimensional Arguments.

Science.gov (United States)

Choi, Ji Yeh; Hwang, Heungsun; Timmerman, Marieke E

2018-03-01

Parallel factor analysis (PARAFAC) is a useful multivariate method for decomposing three-way data that consist of three different types of entities simultaneously. This method estimates trilinear components, each of which is a low-dimensional representation of a set of entities, often called a mode, to explain the maximum variance of the data. Functional PARAFAC permits the entities in different modes to be smooth functions or curves, varying over a continuum, rather than a collection of unconnected responses. The existing functional PARAFAC methods handle functions of a one-dimensional argument (e.g., time) only. In this paper, we propose a new extension of functional PARAFAC for handling three-way data whose responses are sequenced along both a two-dimensional domain (e.g., a plane with x- and y-axis coordinates) and a one-dimensional argument. Technically, the proposed method combines PARAFAC with basis function expansion approximations, using a set of piecewise quadratic finite element basis functions for estimating two-dimensional smooth functions and a set of one-dimensional basis functions for estimating one-dimensional smooth functions. In a simulation study, the proposed method appeared to outperform the conventional PARAFAC. We apply the method to EEG data to demonstrate its empirical usefulness.

Transfer Mispricing as an Argument for Corporate Social Responsibility

OpenAIRE

Asongu, Simplice; Nwachukwu, Jacinta C.

2016-01-01

This article presents a case for transfer mispricing as an argument for Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR). The argument builds on the position that in order to compensate for potential loss of brand image and reputation, Multinational Companies (MNCs) would be more socially responsible when they are operating in countries where the legislation and laws in place are not effective at identifying and sanctioning transfer mispricing. We first discuss the dark side of transfer pricing (TP), ne...

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.

Understanding a High School Physics Teacher's Pedagogical Content Knowledge of Argumentation

Science.gov (United States)

Wang, Jianlan; Buck, Gayle A.

2016-01-01

Scientific argumentation is an important learning objective in science education. It is also an effective instructional approach to constructivist science learning. The implementation of argumentation in school settings requires science teachers, who are pivotal agents of transforming classroom practices, to develop sophisticated knowledge of…

(Non-)Arguments in Long-Distance Extractions

DEFF Research Database (Denmark)

Nyvad, Anne Mette; Kizach, Johannes; Christensen, Ken Ramshøj

2015-01-01

Previous research has shown that in fully grammatical sentences, response time increases and acceptability decreases when the filler in a long-distance extraction is incom- patible with the matrix verb. This effect could potentially be due to a difference between argument and adjunct extraction. ...

On the physical problem of spatial dimensions: an alternative procedure to stability arguments

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Caruso, F.; Xavier, R.M.

1986-01-01

The three-dimensionality of space as a physical problem is discussed. Consideration on previous works is done, in which it is showed that the n-dimensional solar system can be stable only for n=3 and, from quantum mechanics, that this is the case also for hydrogen atons. Thus the epistemological consequences of the use of the stability postulate to derive spatial dimensionality is critically reviewed. The distinguished role of Maxwell's eletromagnetic theory in the determination of space dimensionality is stressed. 'Metric versus' 'topological' 'arguments are compared and shown to apply respectively to 'matter' and 'fields'. (G.D.F.) [pt

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.

The effects of online peer feedback and epistemic beliefs on students’ argumentation-based learning

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Noroozi, Omid; Hatami, Javad

2018-01-01

Although the importance of students’ argumentative peer feedback for learning is undeniable, there is a need for further empirical evidence on whether and how it is related to various aspects of argumentation-based learning namely argumentative essay writing, domain-specific learning, and

SECRETARIAT AND TEXTUAL PRODUCTION: ARGUMENTATION IN THE TEXTUAL GENRE LETTER OF DECLARATION

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Erivaldo Pereira do Nascimento

2012-05-01

Full Text Available This article aims at describing the semantic argumentative structure of the textual/discursive genre Letter of Declaration, one of the documents with which the executive secretary frequently deals. This investigation is based on the Argumention Theory in the Language proposed by Ducrot (1988,1987. We also used the studies about Discursive Modalization proposed by Koch (2002, Castilho e Castilho (1993, Nascimento (2005, among others. Modalization is considered here as a semantic argumentative strategy, as it enables the speaker to make a statement or to express a point of view about the content of his/her enunciation, according to the interlocution. This study about the previously mentioned gender is qualitative, quantitative and descriptive. The corpus used is composed of 20 (twenty Letters of Declaration issued by different organizations or private and public institutions. We perceived that in the Letters of Declaration analysed argumentation is achieved by the use of modalizers and argumentative operators, used by the speaker to produce different effects of meaning in the texts.

Focus, accent, and argument structure: effects on language comprehension.

Science.gov (United States)

Birch, S; Clifton, C

1995-01-01

Four experiments investigated the effect of syntactic argument structure on the evaluation and comprehension of utterances with different patterns of pitch accents. Linguistic analyses of the relation between focus and prosody note that it is possible for certain accented constituents within a broadly focused phrase to project focus to the entire phrase. We manipulated focus requirements and accent in recorded question-answer pairs and asked listeners to make linguistic judgments of prosodic appropriateness (Experiments 1 and 3) or to make judgments based on meaningful comprehension (Experiments 2 and 4). Naive judgments of prosodic appropriateness were generally consistent with the linguistic analyses, showing preferences for utterances in which contextually new noun phrases received accent and old noun phrases did not, but suggested that an accented new argument NP was not fully effective in projecting broad focus to the entire VP. However, the comprehension experiments did demonstrate that comprehension of a sentence with broad VP focus was as efficient when only a lexical argument NP received accent as when both NP and verb received accent. Such focus projection did not occur when the argument NP was an "independent quantifier" such as nobody or everything. The results extend existing demonstrations that the ease of understanding spoken discourse depends on appropriate intonational marking of focus to cases where certain structurally-defined words can project focus-marking to an entire phrase.

A Synthesis of Grice-Strawson‟s, and Putnam‟s Arguments in ...

African Journals Online (AJOL)

... the strength and weaknesses and then come out with a synthesis of the arguments. In other words, the paper intends to attempt an alternative defence of the analytic-synthetic distinction from the synthesis of the arguments. Keywords: Semantical rule, Satisfactory explanation, Analyticity, Formal language, Web of belief.

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…

Refuting the "Nimble Fingers" Argument [and] Working Together against Child Labour.

Science.gov (United States)

World of Work, 1996

1996-01-01

An International Labour Organization study refutes one of the most common arguments of apologists for child labor in the hand-woven carpet industry--the so-called nimble fingers argument. Excerpts from presentations at an International Labour Organization meeting highlight the commitment to eradicating child labor. (JOW)

Rhetorical Use of Inscriptions in Students' Written Arguments About Socioscientific Issues

Science.gov (United States)

Xiao, Sihan

2018-05-01

Educators expect that students be able to make informed decisions about science-related problems in their everyday lives. Engaging science in such problems often entails evaluating available evidence for given arguments. This study explores how students use inscriptions as evidence to argue about socioscientific issues. Fifth- and sixth-grade students (N = 102) in two intact classrooms completed written argument tasks in which they were asked to cite given inscriptions to support their decisions about energy use or genetically modified organisms. Qualitative content analyses of these written arguments, which focused on the coordination between inscriptions and claims, show three patterns of rhetorical use of inscriptions: seeing is believing, believing is seeing, and asserting is inferring. What counts as evidence was not the inscriptions per se, but the rhetorical functions they performed in particular arguments. These findings suggest that justifying socioscientific decisions is functionally different from explaining scientific phenomena. Linking these two activities in school may help students more productively engage with science in their everyday lives.

Effects of a Training Intervention to Foster Argumentation Skills While Processing Conflicting Scientific Positions

Science.gov (United States)

Hefter, Markus H.; Berthold, Kirsten; Renkl, Alexander; Riess, Werner; Schmid, Sebastian; Fries, Stefan

2014-01-01

Argumentation skills play a crucial role in science education and in preparing school students to act as informed citizens. While processing conflicting scientific positions regarding topics such as sustainable development in the domain of ecology, argumentation skills such as evaluating arguments or supporting theories with evidence are…

Implementation of Web-Based Argumentation in Facilitating Elementary School Students to Learn Environmental Issues

Science.gov (United States)

Wang, T. H.

2014-01-01

This research develops a Web-based argumentation system named the Web-based Interactive Argumentation System (WIAS). WIAS can provide teachers with the scaffolding for argumentation instruction. Students can propose their statements, collect supporting evidence and share and discuss with peers online. This research adopts a quasi-experimental…

The experience of applying academic service learning within the ...

African Journals Online (AJOL)

The experience of applying academic service learning within the discipline of speech pathology and audiology at a South African university. ... The argument put forward is that this type of pedagogy would appear to be applicable across a broad range of disciplines and represents one strategy for assisting higher education ...

Preservice teachers' discursive approaches to constructing scientific arguments from evidence to claim

Science.gov (United States)

Gilles, Brent David

Scientific argumentation has recently become required in K-12 classrooms, but preservice teachers often do not have prior experiences with this practice. The lack of prior experiences has made engaging in argumentation during inquiry-based content courses a priority for science teacher educators because of its importance in science education. Previous research has not examined how preservice teachers construct arguments in classroom interactions. A discourse analysis of twenty-one preservice teachers was conducted to study how preservice teachers constructed arguments within small group activities. Specifically, I drew upon discursive psychology (Potter & Wetherell, 1987) and conversation analysis (Sacks, 1972) to consider how preservice teachers' talk functioned to build arguments, as well as how their talk evolved over the course of the four targeted activities. Findings indicated that the preservice teachers oriented towards institutional norms in constructing arguments. These norms shaped the ways that arguments were constructed. The construction of arguments also included negotiating epistemic authority. This authority was used by a member of the group to take up a leadership position, which they used to direct the group's actions. However, there were moments that other group members attempted to take up epistemic stances, which created instances where members used various talk moves (e.g., overlapping speech, ignoring, and holding the conversational floor) to implicitly disagree with each other. As the activities progressed the students spontaneously adopted asynchronous online collaborative tools that seemed to shape their discourse by decreasing conceptually rich talk. The transition from talk to text also coincided with an increased reliance on the teacher, which changed from focusing on expectations of the assignment to how evidence should be organized. Overall, the findings demonstrated how preservice teachers used discourse, specifically talk, to

Unidade de efeito pela organização argumentativa em blocos semânticos = Unity effect through the argumentative organization in semantic blocks

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Karina Saraiva Schröder

2009-04-01

Full Text Available Este artigo pretende mostrar a relação enunciativo-argumentativa do locutor com seu dizer. O estudo insere-se no quadro teórico da Argumentação na Língua, desenvolvido por Ducrot e colaboradores, o qual postula que o sentido está na língua e é argumentativo. Ao aplicar os conceitos de polifonia e blocos semânticos – forma atual da teoria – a um conto de Edgar Allan Poe, buscamos verificar, metodologicamente, como a organização argumentativa em blocossemânticos orienta o interlocutor à unidade de sentido.The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate the argumentative relation a speaker holds with his saying. This is done within the framework of Theory of Argumentation within Language developed by Ducrot and collaborators, which postulates that meaning is in the language and that it is argumentative. By applying the concepts of polyphony and semantic blocks – the current stage of the theory – to a short story by Edgar Allan Poe, we intend to verify in what way the argumentative organization in semantic blocks guides the reader to a unity of meaning.

Argumentation Skills: A Peer Assessment Approach to Discussions in the EFL Classroom

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Diego Fernando Ubaque Casallas

2016-07-01

Full Text Available This paper presents an exploratory action research study carried out by two English as a foreign language teachers in a private, non-profit institution in Bogota, Colombia, with a group of 12 learners in a B1 English course. These students faced difficulties elaborating on their ideas when discussing issues in class. The study placed emphasis on the use of argumentation outlines and peer assessment to boost learners’ argumentative abilities. Audio-taped conversations and open-ended interviews were used to understand the impact on the pedagogical intervention. Findings revealed that argumentation outlines and peer assessment can promote learners’ awareness and ability to engage in argumentation processes. Moreover, peer assessment appears to be an essential tool for enhancing personal and collaborative learning, as well as for promoting learner reflection and agency.

Analysis of Arguments in the Public Debate on the Alphabet Change in bilingual Kazakhstan

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Lyazzat Kimanova

2011-12-01

Full Text Available By focusing on an example of a public social debate on language policy, this article aims at showing the relevant contribution of argument analysis to the understanding of such debates. Argumentative discourse constitutes an essential condition for real democratic practice. Perelman & Olbrechts-Tyteca (1958: 73 point out that the commitment to argumentative practice offers an alternative to the use of violence. The relationship between argumentation and a democratic society is fundamental: argumentation is the substance of democracy, which differs from other social systems in that the only legitimate power is the power of the word. It is free will, which builds on the word alone, that enables us to live together in freedom. An important aspect of democracy, being based on a dialectic ideal, is its uncertain outcome: van Eemeren (2002: 71 characterizes democracy as «institutionalized uncertainty». Thus, insight into the functioning of argumentation contributes significantly to the understanding of democratic processes

Improving Undergraduates’ Argumentative Group Essay Writing through Self-assessment

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Yong Mei Fung

2015-10-01

Full Text Available When writing an argumentative essay, writers develop and evaluate arguments to embody, initiate, or simulate various kinds of interpersonal and textual interaction for reader consideration (Wu & Allison, 2003. This is quite challenging for English as a second language (ESL learners. To improve the quality of their writing, students need to review their draft throughout the writing process. This study aimed to investigate the effect of self-assessment in group writing and how group work improves students’ writing ability. An intact class comprising 22 first-year undergraduates participated in the study.  Data were collected from pre- and post-treatment writing tests, semi-structured interview and reflection entries. The results revealed that self-assessment has a significant effect on students’ writing performance. Group work also enhanced social and cognitive development of the students. This study provides insights into the use of self-assessment in writing class to develop learner autonomy and improve writing ability. Keywords: Argumentative essay, Self-assessment, Learner autonomy, Group writing, ESL learners

An Examination of the Effects of Argument Mapping on Students' Memory and Comprehension Performance

Science.gov (United States)

Dwyer, Christopher P.; Hogan, Michael J.; Stewart, Ian

2013-01-01

Argument mapping (AM) is a method of visually diagramming arguments to allow for easy comprehension of core statements and relations. A series of three experiments compared argument map reading and construction with hierarchical outlining, text summarisation, and text reading as learning methods by examining subsequent memory and comprehension…

Twitter vs. Facebook: Using Social Media to Promote Collaborative Argumentation in an Online Classroom

Science.gov (United States)

Owens, Marissa; Nussbaum, E. Michael

2017-01-01

This study aimed to: 1) evaluate Twitter as a viable tool for promoting collaborative argumentation; 2) determine if scripting through sentence openers promotes a greater number of arguments within an online discussion; and 3) compare Twitter to Facebook as viable tools for promoting collaborative argumentation. Participants were 27 undergraduate…

Swiss residents' arguments for and against a career in medicine

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Klaghofer Richard

2006-08-01

Full Text Available Abstract Background In some Western countries, the medical profession is continuously losing prestige, doctors are claiming of high demands, low rewards, and difficult structural working conditions. This study aimed to investigate the arguments given by Swiss residents for and against a career in medicine. Methods As part of a prospective cohort study of Swiss medical school graduates on career development, 567 fourth-year residents were asked to answer the free-response item of what arguments there still were in favour of or against a career in medicine. They also indicated whether they would choose the medical profession all over again (yes/no. The statements were transcribed, content categories inductively formulated, and their descriptions written down in a code manual. Arguments were encoded according to the code manual and assigned to eight content categories (Mayring's content analysis. Frequency distributions were given for categories and tested with Chi2-tests for differences in gender, speciality fields, and whether or not the respondent would again choose a career in medicine. Results The 567 participants made 1,640 statements in favour of and 1,703 statements against a career in medicine. The content analysis of the residents' answers yielded eight categories with arguments both for and against a career in medicine. Of all "statements for" responses, 70% fell into the two top-ranking categories of Personal experiences in day-to-day working life (41.2% and Interpersonal experiences in professional relationships (28.8%. The top-ranking category of the "statements against" arguments was General work-related structural conditions (32%, followed by Social prestige and health-policy aspects (21%. Main arguments in favour of a career in medicine were interdisciplinary challenge, combination of basic sciences and interpersonal concerns, helping suffering people, guarantee of a secure job; arguments against comprised high workload, time

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

Computing Preferred Extensions for Argumentation Systems with Sets of Attacking

DEFF Research Database (Denmark)

Nielsen, Søren Holbech; Parsons, Simon

2006-01-01

The hitherto most abstract, and hence general, argumentation system, is the one described by Dung in a paper from 1995. This framework does not allow for joint attacks on arguments, but in a recent paper we adapted it to support such attacks, and proved that this adapted framework enjoyed the same...... formal properties as that of Dung. One problem posed by Dung's original framework, which was neglected for some time, is how to compute preferred extensions of the argumentation systems. However, in 2001, in a paper by Doutre and Mengin, a procedure was given for enumerating preferred extensions...... for these systems. In this paper we propose a method for enumerating preferred extensions of the potentially more complex systems, where joint attacks are allowed. The method is inspired by the one given by Doutre and Mengin....

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 modal-epistemic argument for the existence of God is flawed

NARCIS (Netherlands)

S. Wintein (Stefan)

2018-01-01

textabstractIn a recent article, Emanuel Rutten has presented a novel argument for the existence of God, defined as a personal being that is the first cause of reality. An interesting feature of the argument, which caused quite a stir, is that it does not fall within any of the traditional

A Labeling Approach to the Computation of Credulous Acceptance in Argumentation

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Verheij, Bart; Veloso, MM

2007-01-01

In recent years, the combinatorics of argumentation with arguments that can attack each other has been studied extensively. Especially, attack graphs (put in the focus of attention by Dung's seminal work 1995) have proven to be a productive tool of analysis. In this paper a new style of algorithm is

Sexuality in institutionalized elderly persons: a systematic review of argument-based ethics literature.

Science.gov (United States)

Mahieu, Lieslot; Gastmans, Chris

2012-03-01

Admission to a nursing home might challenge the way in which individuals experience their own sexuality, but it does not automatically diminish their need and desire for sexual fulfillment. Despite the fact that sexuality proves to be an intrinsic part of human existence, the sexual expression of geriatric residents remains a sensitive subject for many caregivers and family members. It evokes a variety of ethical issues and concerns, especially when dementia patients are involved. The overall objective of this review was to examine the ethical arguments and concepts about the debate on sexuality within a nursing home environment. We conducted a systematic search for argument-based ethics literature focusing on sexuality in institutionalized elderly people. Twenty-five appropriate studies were identified. A thematic analysis of the included literature led us to distinguish two major groups of ethical arguments: (i) principles and (ii) care. Ethics arguments on sexuality in institutionalized elderly are particularly guided by the principle of respect for autonomy and the concomitant notion of informed consent. Arguments related to care were also apparent within the research literature although they received considerably less attention than the arguments related to the principles of respect for autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence and justice. The lack of clarity in the conceptualization of the arguments referred to in the research literature indicates that there is a pressing need for a better defined, more fundamental philosophical-ethical analysis of the values at stake.

A critique of an argument against patent rights for essential medicines

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Jorn Sonderholm

2014-09-01

Full Text Available Thomas Pogge has recently argued that the way in which research and development of essential medicines is incentivized, under existing World Trade Organization rules, should be supplemented with an additional incentivizing mechanism. One might hold a stronger view than the one that Pogge currently holds, namely that patent rights for essential medicines are morally unjustified per se. Throughout this paper, ‘the strong view’ refers to this view. The strong view is one that enjoys considerable support both within and outside the academic community. This paper critically discusses one specific argument in favor of the strong view. This argument is named the ‘Poggean argument’. This denominator is appropriate because a number of the essential premises of the argument are constituted by propositions that Pogge at some point has defended. The Poggean argument is valid, and defenders of the strong view also have some grounds for believing that the argument is sound. This belief comes, however, with what is arguably a too high cost, namely that the global institutional order becomes very demanding on taxpaying citizens of high-income countries if it is to be just. One may find acceptance of this cost relatively unproblematic, but this cost is, it is argued, unacceptable to anyone who has views on distributive justice that are sympathetic to the core tenets of libertarianism.

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.

Tswanarising global gayness: the 'unAfrican' argument, Western gay media imagery, local responses and gay culture in Botswana.

Science.gov (United States)

McAllister, John

2013-01-01

This paper is a strategic intervention in the debate over the value of globalised gay identity for emerging sexual minority communities in the South. Focusing on self-identifying gay men in Botswana using semi-structured interviews, it explores their views of what characterises 'modern gay culture' and relates these to international media clichés of a glamorous, stylish, hedonistic gayness. I argue that identifying with what is so visibly a Western image of gayness exposes sexual minority communities to the most dangerous of the justifications for homophobia in Africa, the argument that sexual dissidence is a neo-colonial conspiracy to subvert 'African values'. The 'unAfrican' argument has to be taken very seriously, not only because it taps into the intense, conflicted emotions at the heart of the post-colonial condition, but also because it contains an undeniable germ of truth. This poses a dilemma, since global gay discourses, including the media clichés, are an important source of inspiration for African sexual minorities. A communication activism strategy is proposed to undermine the unAfrican argument by cultivating and asserting the 'tswanarisation' of gay culture in Botswana that is already taking place. A similar strategy may also be effective in other African societies.

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

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

2018-01-01

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…

Characterizing the changes in teaching practice during first semester implementation of an argument-based inquiry approach in a middle school science classroom

Science.gov (United States)

Pinney, Brian Robert John

classroom video with transcripts, teacher interview, researcher field notes, student journals, teacher lesson plans from previous years, and a student questionnaire. Data analysis used a basic qualitative approach. The results showed (1) only the first time period had a true big idea, while the other two units contained topics, (2) each semester contained a similar use for the given big idea, though its role in the class was reduced after the opening activity, (3) the types of teacher questions shifted toward students explaining their comprehension of ideas and more students were involved in discussing each idea and for more turns of talk than in earlier time periods, (4) understanding science term definitions became more prominent later in the semester, with more stating science terms occurring earlier in the semester, (5) no significant changes were seen to the use of argument or claims and evidence throughout the study. The findings have informed theory and practice about science argumentation, the practice of whole-class dialogue, and the understanding of practice along four aspects: (1) apparent lack of understanding about big ideas and how to utilize them as the central organizing feature of a unit, (2) independent development of dialogue and argument, (3) apparent lack of understanding about the structure of argument and use of basic terminology with argument and big ideas, (4) challenges of ABI implementation. This study provides insight into the importance of prolonged and persistent professional development with ABI in teaching practice.

MULTIMODAL CONSTRUCTION OF CHILDREN'S ARGUMENTS IN DISPUTES DURING PLAY

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Rosemberg, Celia Renata

2013-09-01

Full Text Available Within the framework of a sociocultural theory of human development and learning (Vigotsky, 2009; Bruner, 1986; Nelson, 1996; Tomasello, 1998, 2003, this paper aims to investigate the multimodal construction of arguments produced by 5 year-old children during disputes in a kindergarten play situation. We considered the juxtaposition of information provided by resources from different semiotic fields (Goodwin, 2000, 2007. The corpus consists of the interactions in a group of children while they play with building blocks. This play situation was videotaped in a kindergarten classroom that is attended by an urban marginalized population of outer Buenos Aires, Argentina. The analysis makes use of the qualitative logic derived from the methodological tools of Conversation Analysis developed in previous research (Goodwin, 2000, 2007; Goodwin and Goodwin, 1990, 2000; Goodwin, Goodwin and Yaeger-Dror, 2002. The results show the different semiotic fields that overlap with the linguistic expression of the arguments or points of view that children maintain while quarrelling during play situations. This demonstrates the importance of attending to intonation, the use of space, the direction of gaze, gestures, and body positioning as they are components that contribute to the argumentative force of the utterances in disputes. These elements emerge as indicators of the emotions that parties experience in disputes which can not be disregarded when attempting to account for how argumentation occurs in real situations of interaction. This paper is written in Spanish.

Statistics As Principled Argument

CERN Document Server

Abelson, Robert P

2012-01-01

In this illuminating volume, Robert P. Abelson delves into the too-often dismissed problems of interpreting quantitative data and then presenting them in the context of a coherent story about one's research. Unlike too many books on statistics, this is a remarkably engaging read, filled with fascinating real-life (and real-research) examples rather than with recipes for analysis. It will be of true interest and lasting value to beginning graduate students and seasoned researchers alike. The focus of the book is that the purpose of statistics is to organize a useful argument from quantitative

Factors in the development of higher levels of reading literacy: Argumentation skills in educational practice

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Branković Marija

2013-01-01

Full Text Available The highest levels of reading literacy, as defined within PISA study, include the ability to use various cognitive skills, with argumentative skills being one of the most important among them. In the present study our goal was to reveal some of the factors that influence the development of argumentative skills in Serbian schools. We investigated the extent to which argumentative skills are required in PISA reading literacy tasks, as well as the specific difficulties our students have faced on these tasks, through an analysis of student performance. We also conducted an analysis of the educational practice - by doing in-depth interviews with teachers and content analysis of students' textbooks. The results revealed that: 1 Argumentations skills are an important requirement within PISA tasks; 2 Serbian students are mostly successful at basic tasks of recognizing arguments or providing arguments for the given position; they face difficulties answering the tasks which require precise formulation of relevant arguments as well as those demanding meta-cognitive skills (e.g. recognizing persuasive strategies in the given text. Their performance is particularly poor on tasks requiring the combination of information from different sources or information presented in different formats (text, tables, or graphs; 3 There is a significant gap between the requirements for argumentation skills our students usually encounter and PISA reading literacy tasks. In this paper we discuss some of the difficulties and obstacles to encouraging the development of argumentative thinking.

Pre-Service Physics Teachers' Argumentation in a Model Rocketry Physics Experience

Science.gov (United States)

Gürel, Cem; Süzük, Erol

2017-01-01

This study investigates the quality of argumentation developed by a group of pre-service physics teachers' (PSPT) as an indicator of subject matter knowledge on model rocketry physics. The structure of arguments and scientific credibility model was used as a design framework in the study. The inquiry of model rocketry physics was employed in…

From gulf to bridge: when do moral arguments facilitate political influence?

Science.gov (United States)

Feinberg, Matthew; Willer, Robb

2015-12-01

Much of contemporary American political rhetoric is characterized by liberals and conservatives advancing arguments for the morality of their respective political positions. However, research suggests such moral rhetoric is largely ineffective for persuading those who do not already hold one's position because advocates advancing these arguments fail to account for the divergent moral commitments that undergird America's political divisions. Building on this, we hypothesize that (a) political advocates spontaneously make arguments grounded in their own moral values, not the values of those targeted for persuasion, and (b) political arguments reframed to appeal to the moral values of those holding the opposing political position are typically more effective. We find support for these claims across six studies involving diverse political issues, including same-sex marriage, universal health care, military spending, and adopting English as the nation's official langauge. Mediation and moderation analyses further indicated that reframed moral appeals were persuasive because they increased the apparent agreement between the political position and the targeted individuals' moral values. © 2015 by the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc.

Does prior domain-specific content knowledge influence students' recall of arguments surrounding interdisciplinary topics?

Science.gov (United States)

Schmidt, Hiemke K; Rothgangel, Martin; Grube, Dietmar

2017-12-01

Awareness of various arguments can help interactants present opinions, stress points, and build counterarguments during discussions. At school, some topics are taught in a way that students learn to accumulate knowledge and gather arguments, and later employ them during debates. Prior knowledge may facilitate recalling information on well structured, fact-based topics, but does it facilitate recalling arguments during discussions on complex, interdisciplinary topics? We assessed the prior knowledge in domains related to a bioethical topic of 277 students from Germany (approximately 15 years old), their interest in the topic, and their general knowledge. The students read a text with arguments for and against prenatal diagnostics and tried to recall the arguments one week later and again six weeks later. Prior knowledge in various domains related to the topic individually and separately helped students recall the arguments. These relationships were independent of students' interest in the topic and their general knowledge. Copyright © 2017 The Foundation for Professionals in Services for Adolescents. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

The scientific argumentation profile of physics teacher candidate in Surabaya

Science.gov (United States)

Ain, T. N.; Wibowo, H. A. C.; Rohman, A.; Deta, U. A.

2018-03-01

The ability of scientific argumentation is an essential factor that must be mastered by physics teacher candidate as a requirement in explaining good and accurate scientific concepts. In the process of arguing, students develop explanations or persuade colleagues to support their hypotheses, express doubts, ask questions, relate alternative answers, and confirm what is unknown to develop the ability to provide rational and scientific explanations. The design of this research is descriptive qualitative with the subject of research is 20 undergraduate students of Physics Education Department in Surabaya. The research instrument consists of four casuistic questions related to the concept of kinematics. The argumentation pattern of physics teacher candidate is coded using Toulmin's argumentation pattern. The results show that the student’s ability in providing scientific argument is at the level of providing claims with the support of a weak warrant. The students are not able to provide excellent rebuttals. In each case given, the student can give a good claim statement in answering the questions. However, the concept used to support the claim is not correct. This case causes the warrant used to support the claim is weak. Students also do not analyse other facts that affect the system. Students have not reached a higher level because the understanding of physics is not deep enough.

Semantic motivation for the denotational identity of arguments in predication structures

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Viara Maldjieva

2015-11-01

Full Text Available Semantic motivation for the denotational identity of arguments in predication structures This text is an attempt at a preliminary outline of the factors that motivate the denotational identity of argument content in the predication structure as well as the consequences of this identity for the shape of the sentence expression which is a realization of such a structure. The first question this analysis attempts to answer concerns the structure of predicative concepts that constitute the predication structure with arguments of the identical content? The second question the cursory analysis done attempts to answer concerns the manner, in which the identity existing on the semantic structure level is signaled on the surface, in the formal structure.

On feature augmentation for semantic argument classification of the Quran English translation using support vector machine

Science.gov (United States)

Khaira Batubara, Dina; Arif Bijaksana, Moch; Adiwijaya

2018-03-01

Research on the semantic argument classification requires semantically labeled data in large numbers, called corpus. Because building a corpus is costly and time-consuming, recently many studies have used existing corpus as the training data to conduct semantic argument classification research on new domain. But previous studies have proven that there is a significant decrease in performance when classifying semantic arguments on different domain between the training and the testing data. The main problem is when there is a new argument that found in the testing data but it is not found in the training data. This research carries on semantic argument classification on a new domain that is Quran English Translation by utilizing Propbank corpus as the training data. To recognize the new argument in the training data, this research proposes four new features for extending the argument features in the training data. By using SVM Linear, the experiment has proven that augmenting the proposed features to the baseline system with some combinations option improve the performance of semantic argument classification on Quran data using Propbank Corpus as training data.

Missed Opportunities for Science Learning: Unacknowledged Unscientific Arguments in Asynchronous Online and Face-to-Face Discussions

Science.gov (United States)

Callis-Duehl, Kristine; Idsardi, Robert; Humphrey, Eve A.; Gougis, Rebekka Darner

2018-02-01

We explored the scientific argumentation that occurs among university biology students during an argumentation task implemented in two environments: face-to-face in a classroom and online in an asynchronous discussion. We observed 10 student groups, each composed of three students. Our analysis focused on how students respond to their peers' unscientific arguments, which we define as assertions, hypotheses, propositions, or explanations that are inaccurate or incomplete from a scientific perspective. Unscientific arguments provide opportunities for productive dissent, scientific argumentation, and conceptual development of scientifically desirable conceptions. We found that students did not respond to the majority of unscientific arguments in both environments. Challenges to unscientific arguments were expressed as a question or through explanation, although the latter was more common online than face-to-face. Students demonstrated significantly more epistemic distancing in the face-to-face environment than the online environment. We discuss the differences in discourse observed in both environments and teaching implications. We also provide direction for future research seeking to address the challenges of engaging students in productive scientific argumentation in both face-to-face and online environments.

A TEACHING PROPOSAL OF PRODUCTION OF DISSERTATIVE-ARGUMENTATIVE TEXTS BASED ON THE THEORY OF SEMANTIC BLOCKS

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Cláudio Primo Delanoy

2015-12-01

Full Text Available This paper aims to explain a teaching proposal of production of dissertative-argumentative texts, based on concepts and principles of the Theory of Argumentation within Language (ADL of Ducrot (1990, 2009, and above all in tools made available by the Theory of Semantic Blocks (TBS, Carel (1995, 2005, and Carel and Ducrot (2005. In order to do so, first, the text production proposal of Enem 2012 is analyzed, so as to find the basic semantic units of its motivational texts, which, by being associated to argumentative aspects of semantic blocks that originate those semantic units, may guide effective argumentative routes to be realized in dissertative argumentative text from semantic relations within the same block. It is verified, also, to what extent argumentative transgressive chaining are presented in argumentative essays as more convincing than the normative argumentative ones. As a result, this work may provide theoretical and methodological support for teachers that have been working directly with the teaching of reading and writing, in basic or superior education levels.

Towards Personalized Medicine: Leveraging Patient Similarity and Drug Similarity Analytics

Science.gov (United States)

Zhang, Ping; Wang, Fei; Hu, Jianying; Sorrentino, Robert

2014-01-01

The rapid adoption of electronic health records (EHR) provides a comprehensive source for exploratory and predictive analytic to support clinical decision-making. In this paper, we investigate how to utilize EHR to tailor treatments to individual patients based on their likelihood to respond to a therapy. We construct a heterogeneous graph which includes two domains (patients and drugs) and encodes three relationships (patient similarity, drug similarity, and patient-drug prior associations). We describe a novel approach for performing a label propagation procedure to spread the label information representing the effectiveness of different drugs for different patients over this heterogeneous graph. The proposed method has been applied on a real-world EHR dataset to help identify personalized treatments for hypercholesterolemia. The experimental results demonstrate the effectiveness of the approach and suggest that the combination of appropriate patient similarity and drug similarity analytics could lead to actionable insights for personalized medicine. Particularly, by leveraging drug similarity in combination with patient similarity, our method could perform well even on new or rarely used drugs for which there are few records of known past performance. PMID:25717413

On security arguments of the second round SHA-3 candidates

DEFF Research Database (Denmark)

Andreeva, Elena; Bogdanov, Andrey; Mennink, Bart

2012-01-01

of which got accepted to the first round. 14 candidates were left in the second round, out of which five candidates have been recently chosen for the final round. An important criterion in the selection process is the SHA-3 hash function security. We identify two important classes of security arguments...... for the new designs: (1) the possible reductions of the hash function security to the security of its underlying building blocks and (2) arguments against differential attack on building blocks. In this paper, we compare the state of the art provable security reductions for the second round candidates...... and review arguments and bounds against classes of differential attacks.We discuss all the SHA-3 candidates at a high functional level, analyze, and summarize the security reduction results and bounds against differential attacks. Additionally, we generalize the well-known proof of collision resistance...

Online Moderation of Synchronous E-Argumentation

Science.gov (United States)

Asterhan, Christa S. C.; Schwarz, Baruch B.

2010-01-01

In this paper, we present findings on moderation of synchronous, small-group argumentation in blended, co-located learning environments. Drawing on findings from the literature on human facilitation of dialogue in face-to-face settings, we first elaborate on the potential promise of this new practice. However, little is known about what…

Det demokratiske argument for absolut ytringsfrihed

DEFF Research Database (Denmark)

Lægaard, Sune

2014-01-01

Artiklen diskuterer den påstand, at absolut ytringsfrihed er en nødvendig forudsætning for demokratisk legitimitet med udgangspunkt i en rekonstruktion af et argument fremsat af Ronald Dworkin. Spørgsmålet er, hvorfor ytringsfrihed skulle være en forudsætning for demokratisk legitimitet, og hvorfor...

Homosexual marriage: The Victory of Political Correctness and Bad Arguments

OpenAIRE

Neven Sesardic

2007-01-01

Many Western intellectuals, especially those in humanities and socialsciences, think that it can be easily shown that the persistent and massive opposition to same-sex marriage is rationally indefensible and that it is merely a result of prejudice or religious fanaticism. But a more detailed analysis of some of these widely accepted arguments against the conservative position reveals that these arguments are in fact based on logical fallacies and serious distortions of conservative criticisms...

Homosexual marriage: The Victory of Political Correctness and Bad Arguments

OpenAIRE

Sesardić, Neven

2007-01-01

Many Western intellectuals, especially those in humanities and social sciences, think that it can be easily shown that the persistent and massive opposition to same-sex marriage is rationally indefensible and that it is merely a result of prejudice or religious fanaticism. But a more detailed analysis of some of these widely accepted arguments against the conservative position reveals that these arguments are in fact based on logical fallacies and serious distortions of conservative critic...

Verbal directionality and argument alternation in Dinka

DEFF Research Database (Denmark)

Andersen, Torben

2012-01-01

The derivational morphology of verbs in Dinka includes a distinction between direction towards the deictic center (centripetal) and a direction not towards the deictic center (centrifugal). A goal adverbial requires a directional verb, and an object of such a verb refers to something that moves t...... of a simple verb may correspond to, respectively, a goal adverbial and an object of the directional verb. Another type of argument alternation results from the possibility of expressing a goal as an object of an applicative verb with an intransitive or transitive base.......(wards) an explicit or implicit goal. The object of a directional verb may play another role in the event described by the sentence than the object of the corresponding simple (and non-directional) verb. This gives rise to so-called argument alternation, in that, for instance, an object and an instrumental adverbial...

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.

Enhancing Trait Argumentativeness and Skill in Arguing: A Review of Instructional Methods.

Science.gov (United States)

Kosberg, Roberta L.; Rancer, Andrew S.

The communication discipline has advanced the belief that arguing (high argumentativeness) is a constructive communication activity. Recent research efforts have attempted the integration of principles from argumentation, interpersonal communication, and conflict management, and several benefits of high motivation to argue and skill in informal…

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

Argumentative activities in physics textbooks of the PNLD 2015: the stimulus still scarce

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

André Henrique Silva Souza

2016-12-01

Full Text Available Research in science education has pointed that argumentation is a necessary practice for the students’ active processes of learning. The official documents signal to the need of introducing support in the classroom for the development of argumentation. Since the science and physics textbooks have been used by teachers as a curriculum conductor in their classes, we consider that the physics textbooks can (and must present methods and means for promoting and support argumentation in the classroom. In align with these assumptions, this study aims to analyze if argumentation processes are stimulated and evocated by activities of each analyzed textbook. We analyzed 7 of the 14 collections of the PNLD (2015 for the case of physics textbooks. Our analyses are based on three criteria: the structure of the proposed activity (well or ill-structured and the markers “contrapositions of ideas” and “reciprocal justifications” The purpose of the analysis is to show if these criteria are evocated or used in the physics textbooks activities. The results show that the analyzed books present, partially, support for the argumentative processes.

Effects of pictures and textual arguments in sun protection public service announcements.

Science.gov (United States)

Boer, Henk; Ter Huurne, Ellen; Taal, Erik

2006-01-01

The effect of public service announcements aimed at promoting primary prevention of skin cancer may be limited by superficial cognitive processing. The use of both pictures and textual arguments in sun protection public service announcements were evaluated for their potentially beneficial effects on judgment, cognitive processing and persuasiveness. In a 2 x 2 factorial experimental design individuals were shown public service announcements that advocated the advantages of sun protection measures in different versions in which a picture was present or not present and a textual argument was present or not present. The 159 participants were randomly assigned to one of four conditions. In each condition, participants were shown 12 different public service announcements designed according to the condition. Participants judged each public service announcement on attractiveness, credibility, clarity of communication and the required amount of reflection. After the judgment task, they completed a questionnaire to assess knowledge, perceived advantages and disadvantages of sun protection and intended use of sun protection measures. Pictures enhanced attractiveness, but diminished comprehension. Textual arguments enhanced attractiveness, credibility and comprehension. Pictures as well as textual arguments increased knowledge of sun protection measures. Pictures and textual arguments in public service announcements positively influence the individual's perception of the advantages of sun protection methods and the advantages of their adoption.

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.

Integrating ontologies and argumentation for decision-making in breast cancer

OpenAIRE

Williams, M. H.

2009-01-01

This thesis describes some of the problems in providing care for patients with breast cancer. These are then used to motivate the development of an extension to an existing theory of argumentation, which I call the Ontology-based Argumentation Formalism (OAF). The work is assessed in both theoretical and empirical ways. From a clinical perspective, there is a problem with the provision of care. Numerous reports have noted the failure to provide uniformly high quality care, as w...

Why autobiographical memories for traumatic and emotional events might differ: theoretical arguments and empirical evidence.

Science.gov (United States)

Sotgiu, Igor; Rusconi, Maria Luisa

2014-01-01

The authors review five arguments supporting the hypothesis that memories for traumatic and nontraumatic emotional events should be considered as qualitatively different recollections. The first argument considers the objective features of traumatic and emotional events and their possible influence on the formation of memories for these events. The second argument assumes that traumatic memories distinguish from emotional ones as trauma exposure is often associated with the development of psychological disorders involving memory disturbances. The third argument is that traumatic experiences are more likely than emotional experiences to be forgotten and recovered. The fourth argument concerns the possibility that emotional memories are socially shared more frequently than traumatic memories. A fifth argument suggests that trauma exposure may impair selected brain systems implicated in memory functions. Theoretical and empirical evidence supporting these claims is reviewed. In the conclusions, the authors illustrate future research directions and discuss some conceptual issues related to the definitions of traumatic event currently employed by memory researchers.

Neurons in red nucleus and primary motor cortex exhibit similar responses to mechanical perturbations applied to the upper-limb during posture

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Troy Michael Herter

2015-04-01

Full Text Available Primary motor cortex (M1 and red nucleus (RN are brain regions involved in limb motor control. Both structures are highly interconnected with the cerebellum and project directly to the spinal cord, although the contribution of RN is smaller than M1. It remains uncertain whether RN and M1 serve similar or distinct roles during posture and movement. Many neurons in M1 respond rapidly to mechanical disturbances of the limb, but it remains unclear whether RN neurons also respond to such limb perturbations. We have compared discharges of single neurons in RN (n = 49 and M1 (n = 109 of one monkey during a postural perturbation task. Neural responses to whole-limb perturbations were examined by transiently applying (300 ms flexor or extensor torques to the shoulder and/or elbow while the monkeys attempted to maintain a static hand posture. Relative to baseline discharges before perturbation onset, perturbations evoked rapid (<100 ms changes of neural discharges in many RN (28 of 49, 57% and M1 (43 of 109, 39% neurons. In addition to exhibiting a greater proportion of perturbation-related neurons, RN neurons also tended to exhibit higher peak discharge frequencies in response to perturbations than M1 neurons. Importantly, neurons in both structures exhibited similar response latencies and tuning properties (preferred torque directions and tuning widths in joint-torque space. Proximal arm muscles also displayed similar tuning properties in joint-torque space. These results suggest that RN is more sensitive than M1 to mechanical perturbations applied during postural control but both structures may play a similar role in feedback control of posture.

When 'national innovation system' meet 'varieties of capitalism' arguments on labour qualifications: On the skill types and scientific knowledge needed for radical and incremental product innovations

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Herrmann, A.M.; Peine, A.

2011-01-01

The literatures on 'varieties of capitalism' (VoC) and 'national innovation systems' (NIS) propose very similar arguments about how firms require different types of labour qualifications to pursue strategies of radical product innovation (RPI), incremental product innovation (IPI), and product

Modelling verb selection within argument structure constructions

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Matusevych, Yevgen; Alishahi, Afra; Backus, Albert

2017-01-01

This article looks into the nature of cognitive associations between verbs and argument structure constructions (ASCs). Existing research has shown that distributional and semantic factors affect speakers' choice of verbs in ASCs. A formal account of this theory has been proposed by Ellis,

A sociocultural historical examination of youth argumentation across the settings of their lives: Implications for science education

Science.gov (United States)

Bricker, Leah A.

In this dissertation, I examine youth argumentative practices as employed over time and across settings. Specifically, I examine youth perspective on argumentation and their own argumentative practices, the relationship between argumentation and learning, and the relationship between argumentation and youth, family, and community cultures. The theoretical framework I employ enables me to analyze argumentation as a set of practices employed in situated activity systems and framed by culturally-influenced ways of understanding activity associated with argumentative practice. I utilize data from a long-term team ethnography of youth science and technology learning across settings and time. Research fieldwork was conducted across dozens of social settings over the course of three years. Data includes approximately 700 hours of participant observations and interviews with thirteen upper elementary and middle school young people, as well as 128 of their parents, extended family members, peers, and teachers. Findings highlight the multitude of meanings youth associate with argumentation as it occurs in their lives (e.g., at home, in classrooms, in neighborhoods), as well as the detailed accounts of their argumentative practices and how these practices are differentially used across the social settings youth frequent. Additionally, findings highlight how historically rooted cultural practices help to frame youth perspectives on argumentation and their argumentative practices. Findings also include details about the specific communicative features of youth argumentation (e.g., linguistic elements such as discourse markers, evidentials, and indexicals, as well as non-verbal gestures) and how communicative features relate to youth learning across settings and over time. I use this dissertation in part to dialogue with the science education community, which currently argues that youth in science classrooms should learn how to argue scientifically. Designs of learning

Self-generated persuasion: effects of the target and direction of arguments.

Science.gov (United States)

Briñol, Pablo; McCaslin, Michael J; Petty, Richard E

2012-05-01

Previous research has revealed that self-persuasion can occur either through role-playing (i.e., when arguments are generated to convince another person) or, more directly, through trying to convince oneself (i.e., when arguments are generated with oneself as the target). Combining these 2 traditions in the domain of attitude change, the present research investigated the impact on self-persuasion of the specific target of one's own persuasive attempt (i.e., others vs. oneself). We found that the efficacy of self-persuasion depended on whether people believed that they would have to put more or less effort in convincing the self or others. Specifically, we found opposite effects for self-generated arguments depending on whether the topic of persuasion was proattitudinal or counterattitudinal. Across 4 studies, it was shown that when the topic of the message was counterattitudinal, people were more effective in convincing themselves when the intended target of the arguments was themselves versus another person. However, the opposite was the case when the topic was proattitudinal. These effects were shown to stem from the differential effort perceived as necessary and actually exerted in trying to produce persuasion under these conditions.

Processing and Representation of Arguments in One-Sided Texts about Disputed Topics

Science.gov (United States)

Wolfe, Michael B.; Tanner, Shawna M.; Taylor, Andrew R.

2013-01-01

We examine students' processing and representation of arguments and counterarguments in one-sided scientific texts. In Experiment 1, students read texts about evolution and TV violence. Sentence reading times indicated that subjects slowed down reading to the extent that arguments were both more consistent, and inconsistent, with the text…

Arguments for the Existence of God in the Francisco Suarez’ "Metaphysical Disputations"

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Galina Vdovina

2017-12-01

Full Text Available The article considers arguments for the existence of God that are presented in Francisco Suarez’ treatise Metaphysical Disputations. The work of Suarez contains the most developed and detailed exposition of natural theology that exists in the scholastic tradition. Suarez explicitates the problem, formulating three questions: what is a being that we call God? Is it possible to prove or justify his existence? How is it possible? Suarez answers the first question by showing that we come to a concept of the prime and excellent being through a series of divisions in the concept of being. That prime being is infinite, absolute, necessary and uncreated. The second question is answered by the procedure of that division and its result. In his answer to the third question, Suarez distinguishes physical and metaphysical arguments. According to Suarez, the most significant physical proofs are the argument from motion and the argument from the rational soul. Nevertheless, he demonstrates that purely physical arguments cannot lead us to a being, which we call God. Only metaphysical argument from the principle, everything which is produced, is produces by something else, is really effective. The logic of the metaphysical proof is as follows: first, we have to demonstrate the necessary existence of the first non-produced thing: secondly, we are to show that such a thing can only be one. The first point is proved through the demonstration of an absolutely first cause in each series of causes, the second one is made evident through a demonstration of the impossibility to coexist simultaneously for two equally perfect first causes of equal causing power.

Arguments and Relationships within the Family: Differences in Young Children's Disputes with Mother and Sibling.

Science.gov (United States)

Slomkowski, Cheryl L.; Dunn, Judy

1992-01-01

A study of 33-month-old children, their mothers, and their older siblings concentrated on arguments used when 2 family members were in conflict with a third. There were some direct relationships between partners' arguments. Arguments children used with their mothers differed from those they used with their siblings. (BG)

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.

First Steps Towards the Automatic Construction of Argument-Diagrams from Real Discussions

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Verbree, Daan; Rienks, R.J.; Heylen, Dirk K.J.; Dunne, P.; Bench-Capon, T.J.E.

This paper presents our efforts to create argument structures from meeting transcripts automatically. We show that unit labels of argument diagrams can be learnt and predicted by a computer with an accuracy of 78,52% and 51,43% on an unbalanced and balanced set respectively. We used a corpus of over

Investigating Correlation between Protein Sequence Similarity and Semantic Similarity Using Gene Ontology Annotations.

Science.gov (United States)

Ikram, Najmul; Qadir, Muhammad Abdul; Afzal, Muhammad Tanvir

2018-01-01

Sequence similarity is a commonly used measure to compare proteins. With the increasing use of ontologies, semantic (function) similarity is getting importance. The correlation between these measures has been applied in the evaluation of new semantic similarity methods, and in protein function prediction. In this research, we investigate the relationship between the two similarity methods. The results suggest absence of a strong correlation between sequence and semantic similarities. There is a large number of proteins with low sequence similarity and high semantic similarity. We observe that Pearson's correlation coefficient is not sufficient to explain the nature of this relationship. Interestingly, the term semantic similarity values above 0 and below 1 do not seem to play a role in improving the correlation. That is, the correlation coefficient depends only on the number of common GO terms in proteins under comparison, and the semantic similarity measurement method does not influence it. Semantic similarity and sequence similarity have a distinct behavior. These findings are of significant effect for future works on protein comparison, and will help understand the semantic similarity between proteins in a better way.

Reading About the Flu Online: How Health-Protective Behavioral Intentions Are Influenced by Media Multitasking, Polychronicity, and Strength of Health-Related Arguments.

Science.gov (United States)

Kononova, Anastasia; Yuan, Shupei; Joo, Eunsin

2017-06-01

As health organizations increasingly use the Internet to communicate medical information and advice (Shortliffe et al., 2000; World Health Organization, 2013), studying factors that affect health information processing and health-protective behaviors becomes extremely important. The present research applied the elaboration likelihood model of persuasion to explore the effects of media multitasking, polychronicity (preference for multitasking), and strength of health-related arguments on health-protective behavioral intentions. Participants read an online article about influenza that included strong and weak suggestions to engage in flu-preventive behaviors. In one condition, participants read the article and checked Facebook; in another condition, they were exposed only to the article. Participants expressed greater health-protective behavioral intentions in the media multitasking condition than in the control condition. Strong arguments were found to elicit more positive behavioral intentions than weak arguments. Moderate and high polychronics showed greater behavioral intentions than low polychronics when they read the article in the multitasking condition. The difference in intentions to follow strong and weak arguments decreased for moderate and high polychronics. The results of the present study suggest that health communication practitioners should account for not only media use situations in which individuals typically read about health online but also individual differences in information processing, which puts more emphasis on the strength of health-protective suggestions when targeting light multitaskers.

Examining causal components and a mediating process underlying self-generated health arguments for exercise and smoking cessation.

Science.gov (United States)

Baldwin, Austin S; Rothman, Alexander J; Vander Weg, Mark W; Christensen, Alan J

2013-12-01

Self-persuasion-generating one's own arguments for engaging in a specific behavior-can be an effective strategy to promote health behavior change, yet the causal processes that explain why it is effective are not well-specified. We sought to elucidate specific causal components and a mediating process of self-persuasion in two health behavior domains: physical activity and smoking. In two experiments, participants were randomized to write or read arguments about regular exercise (Study 1: N = 76; college students) or smoking cessation (Study 2: N = 107; daily smokers). In Study 2, we also manipulated the argument content (matched vs. mismatched participants' own concerns about smoking) to isolate its effect from the effect of argument source (self vs. other). Study outcomes included participants' reports of argument ratings, attitudes, behavioral intentions (Studies 1 & 2), and cessation attempts at 1 month (Study 2). In Study 1, self-generated arguments about exercise were evaluated more positively than other arguments (p = .01, d = .63), and this biased processing mediated the self-generated argument effect on attitudes toward exercise (β = .08, 95% CI = .01, .18). In Study 2, the findings suggested that biased processing occurs because self-generated argument content matches people's own health concerns and not because of the argument source (self vs. other). In addition, self-generated arguments indirectly led to greater behavior change intentions (Studies 1 & 2) and a greater likelihood of a smoking cessation attempt (Study 2). The findings elucidate a causal component and a mediating process that explain why self-persuasion and related behavior change interventions, such as motivational interviewing, are effective. Findings also suggest that self-generated arguments may be an efficient way to deliver message interventions aimed at changing health behaviors.

Show Me Your Opinion. Perceptual Cues in Creating and Reading Argument Diagrams

Science.gov (United States)

van Amelsvoort, Marije; Maes, Alfons

2016-01-01

In argument diagrams, perceptual cues are important to aid understanding. However, we do not know what perceptual cues are used and produced to aid understanding. We present two studies in which we investigate (1) which spatial, graphical and textual elements people spontaneously use in creating for-against argument diagrams, and (2) how people…

Design as Value Celebration: Rethinking Design Argumentation

DEFF Research Database (Denmark)

Halstrøm, Per Liljenberg

2016-01-01

This article introduces knowledge of the rhetorical genre of epideictic to design. The aim is to provide designers with concepts that stimulate their ability to deliberate about design choices and explore the arguments they may be making about the human-made world. The article begins with explora...

The simplest formal argument for fitness optimization

Indian Academy of Sciences (India)

The Formal Darwinism Project aims to provide a formal argument linking population genetics to fitness optimization, which of necessity includes defining fitness. This bridges the gulf between those biologists who assume that natural selection leads to something close to fitness optimization and those biologists who believe ...

Argument-predicate distance as a filter for enhancing precision in extracting predications on the genetic etiology of disease

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Lang François-Michel

2006-06-01

Full Text Available Abstract Background Genomic functional information is valuable for biomedical research. However, such information frequently needs to be extracted from the scientific literature and structured in order to be exploited by automatic systems. Natural language processing is increasingly used for this purpose although it inherently involves errors. A postprocessing strategy that selects relations most likely to be correct is proposed and evaluated on the output of SemGen, a system that extracts semantic predications on the etiology of genetic diseases. Based on the number of intervening phrases between an argument and its predicate, we defined a heuristic strategy to filter the extracted semantic relations according to their likelihood of being correct. We also applied this strategy to relations identified with co-occurrence processing. Finally, we exploited postprocessed SemGen predications to investigate the genetic basis of Parkinson's disease. Results The filtering procedure for increased precision is based on the intuition that arguments which occur close to their predicate are easier to identify than those at a distance. For example, if gene-gene relations are filtered for arguments at a distance of 1 phrase from the predicate, precision increases from 41.95% (baseline to 70.75%. Since this proximity filtering is based on syntactic structure, applying it to the results of co-occurrence processing is useful, but not as effective as when applied to the output of natural language processing. In an effort to exploit SemGen predications on the etiology of disease after increasing precision with postprocessing, a gene list was derived from extracted information enhanced with postprocessing filtering and was automatically annotated with GFINDer, a Web application that dynamically retrieves functional and phenotypic information from structured biomolecular resources. Two of the genes in this list are likely relevant to Parkinson's disease but are not

Argumentation: A Methodology to Facilitate Critical Thinking.

Science.gov (United States)

Makhene, Agnes

2017-06-20

Caring is a difficult nursing activity that involves a complex nature of a human being in need of complex decision-making and problem solving through the critical thinking process. It is mandatory that critical thinking is facilitated in general and in nursing education particularly in order to render care in diverse multicultural patient care settings. This paper aims to describe how argumentation can be used to facilitate critical thinking in learners. A qualitative, exploratory and descriptive design that is contextual was used. Purposive sampling method was used to draw a sample and Miles and Huberman methodology of qualitative analysis was used to analyse data. Lincoln and Guba's strategies were employed to ensure trustworthiness, while Dhai and McQuoid-Mason's principles of ethical consideration were used. Following data analysis the findings were integrated within literature which culminated into the formulation of guidelines that can be followed when using argumentation as a methodology to facilitate critical thinking.

L’argumentation rhétorique et le problème de l’auditoire complexe Rhetorical Argumentation and the Problem of the Complex Audience

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Christopher W. Tindale

2009-04-01

Full Text Available La nécessité pour l’argumentateur de connaître son auditoire afin de persuader est l’un des lieux communs de la théorie de l’argumentation. Mais, en dehors du cas où l’argumentation s’adresse à soi-même ou à un interlocuteur unique, les auditoires vers lesquels nous nous tournons sont de composition complexe, et reflètent la diversité de nos identités et les différents groupes auxquels nous appartenons. Comment les argumentateurs doivent-ils faire face à une telle diversité de l’auditoire ? S’inspirant principalement des travaux de Perelman et Olbrechts-Tyteca, ainsi que de ceux d’Amartya Sen, cet article explore la manière dont divers aspects identitaires sont choisis par les auditoires, et les moyens par lesquels les argumentateurs peuvent encourager de tels choix en préalable à l’acte de persuasion lui-même.It is a commonplace of argumentation theory that an arguer needs to know her or his audience in order to be persuasive. But beyond arguments directed to oneself or to a single interlocutor, the audiences we address are complex in make-up, reflecting the diversity of our own identities and the different groups to which we belong. How should arguers accommodate such diversity within audiences? Drawing principally from the work of Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca, as well as Amartya Sen, this paper explores the ways aspects of identities are chosen by audiences, and how arguers can encourage such choices as a preliminary move to persuasion itself.

Why quota trade should be restricted: The arguments behind the EU position on emissions trading

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Westskog, Hege

2001-01-01

In this paper I try to clarify the background and arguments behind the EU position on emissions trading in negotiating the Kyoto Protocol and their suggestions of how the supplementary cap in the Kyoto agreement can be operationalized. I discuss economic arguments for restricting quota trade with a focus on the market power issue, transaction costs, and ancillary benefits of reducing emissions of climate gases. I also address the problem of hot air as an important argument to restrict quota trade, and arguments for restrictions connected to technological innovation. Finally, I look into the ethical considerations of restrictions. (author)

Why quota trade should be restricted: The arguments behind the EU position on emissions trading

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

Westskog, Hege

2001-07-01

In this paper I try to clarify the background and arguments behind the EU position on emissions trading in negotiating the Kyoto Protocol and their suggestions of how the supplementarity cap in the Kyoto agreement can be operationalized. I discuss economic arguments for restricting quota trade with a focus on the market power issue, transaction costs, and ancillary benefits of reducing emissions of climate gases. I also address the problem of hot air as an important argument to restrict quota trade, and arguments for restrictions connected to technological innovation. Finally, I look into the ethical considerations of restrictions. (author)

IMPROVING LEGAL ARGUMENT CRITICALLY IN THE LITIGATION MECHANISM IN INDONESIA (AN EMPIRICAL STUDY OF ENVIRONMENTAL VERDICTS

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Edy Lisdiyono

2017-01-01

Full Text Available Legal argument is a debate or argument in explaining the issues between two or more people performed in court. Legal argument is one way to perform law finding with the purpose to avoid legal vacuum when the judge makes a legal reasoning in a verdict. In making a legal argument, it is at least performed by legal reasoning, logic, facts. However, some judges, in making a decision, did not use the legal arguments by legal reasoning and facts so that it resulted in debates and arguments. It is  interesting to study on how to build legal argument in the litigation mechanism in Indonesia. Some verdicts in Indonesia have been the debate among the public through social media, by both academic and non-academic communities, because they were not based on the legal facts revealed at the trials and not in favor of the public sense of justice. Some of the examples are the verdict in the case of the environmental lawsuits of Lapindo Brantas Mud in Sidoarjo, the case verdict in Palembang District Court on the lawsuit filed by the Ministry of Environment and Forestry on forest fires and land concessions of PT. Bumi Mekar Hijau in 2014. From the decisions, it turned out that the judges, in making the legal arguments for their decisions, had deviated from the analogy and were not based on the existing legal facts. In building legal arguments, it would have to be conducted by collecting data (evidence and clear fact so that its solutions do not deviate from the rules of law

Developing Environmentally Responsible Behaviours Through the Implementation of Argumentation- and Problem-Based Learning Models

Science.gov (United States)

Fettahlıoğlu, Pınar; Aydoğdu, Mustafa

2018-04-01

The purpose of this research is to investigate the effect of using argumentation and problem-based learning approaches on the development of environmentally responsible behaviours among pre-service science teachers. Experimental activities were implemented for 14 weeks for 52 class hours in an environmental education class within a science teaching department. A mixed method was used as a research design; particularly, a special type of Concurrent Nested Strategy was applied. The quantitative portion was based on the one-group pre-test and post-test models, and the qualitative portion was based on the holistic multiple-case study method. The quantitative portion of the research was conducted with 34 third-year pre-service science teachers studying at a state university. The qualitative portion of the study was conducted with six pre-service science teachers selected among the 34 pre-service science teachers based on the pre-test results obtained from an environmentally responsible behaviour scale. t tests for dependent groups were used to analyse quantitative data. Both descriptive and content analyses of the qualitative data were performed. The results of the study showed that the use of the argumentation and problem-based learning approaches significantly contributed to the development of environmentally responsible behaviours among pre-service science teachers.

Improving the Argumentative Writing of Students with Learning Disabilities: Descriptive and Normative Considerations

Science.gov (United States)

Ferretti, Ralph P.; Andrews-Weckerly, Scott; Lewis, William E.

2007-01-01

Education seeks to cultivate dispositions and skills that promote effective participation in democratic institutions, including the capacity to produce thoughtful written arguments about controversial issues. Unfortunately, students' argumentative writing is generally neither effective nor persuasive, and this is especially so for students with…

Polynomial Similarity Transformation Theory: A smooth interpolation between coupled cluster doubles and projected BCS applied to the reduced BCS Hamiltonian

Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

Degroote, M. [Rice Univ., Houston, TX (United States); Henderson, T. M. [Rice Univ., Houston, TX (United States); Zhao, J. [Rice Univ., Houston, TX (United States); Dukelsky, J. [Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Cientificas (CSIC), Madrid (Spain). Inst. de Estructura de la Materia; Scuseria, G. E. [Rice Univ., Houston, TX (United States)

2018-01-03

We present a similarity transformation theory based on a polynomial form of a particle-hole pair excitation operator. In the weakly correlated limit, this polynomial becomes an exponential, leading to coupled cluster doubles. In the opposite strongly correlated limit, the polynomial becomes an extended Bessel expansion and yields the projected BCS wavefunction. In between, we interpolate using a single parameter. The e ective Hamiltonian is non-hermitian and this Polynomial Similarity Transformation Theory follows the philosophy of traditional coupled cluster, left projecting the transformed Hamiltonian onto subspaces of the Hilbert space in which the wave function variance is forced to be zero. Similarly, the interpolation parameter is obtained through minimizing the next residual in the projective hierarchy. We rationalize and demonstrate how and why coupled cluster doubles is ill suited to the strongly correlated limit whereas the Bessel expansion remains well behaved. The model provides accurate wave functions with energy errors that in its best variant are smaller than 1% across all interaction stengths. The numerical cost is polynomial in system size and the theory can be straightforwardly applied to any realistic Hamiltonian.

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.

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...

Grade 10 Thai students' scientific argumentation in learning about electric field through science, technology, and society (STS) approach

Science.gov (United States)

Chitnork, Amporn; Yuenyong, Chokchai

2018-01-01

The research aimed to enhance Grade 10 Thai students' scientific argumentation in learning about electric field through science, technology, and society (STS) approach. The participants included 45 Grade 10 students who were studying in a school in Nongsonghong, Khon Kaen, Thailand. Methodology regarded interpretive paradigm. The intervention was the force unit which was provided based on Yuenyong (2006) STS approach. Students learned about the STS electric field unit for 4 weeks. The students' scientific argumentation was interpreted based on Toulmin's argument pattern or TAP. The TAP provided six components of argumentation including data, claim, warrants, qualifiers, rebuttals and backing. Tools of interpretation included students' activity sheets, conversation, journal writing, classroom observation and interview. The findings revealed that students held the different pattern of argumentation. Then, they change pattern of argumentation close to the TAP. It indicates that the intervention of STS electric field unit enhance students to develop scientific argumentation. This finding may has implication of further enhancing scientific argumentation in Thailand.

The Argumentative Connective "Meme" in French: An Experimental Study in Eight- to Ten-Year-Old Children.

Science.gov (United States)

Bassano, Dominique; Champaud, Christian

1989-01-01

Examines how children understand the argumentative function of the French connective meme (even). Two completion tasks, related to the argumentative properties of the morpheme, were used: 1) to infer the conclusion of an "even" sentence, and 2) to infer the argument position. (34 references) (Author/CB)

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...

Argumentative Strategies in American and Japanese English.

Science.gov (United States)

Kamimura, Taeko; Oi, Kyoko

1998-01-01

A study examined differences in argumentative strategies in Japanese and American English by analyzing English essays on capital punishment written by 22 American high school seniors and 30 Japanese college sophomores. Differences were found in the organizational patterns, content and use of rational appeals, preference for type of diction, and…

Contesting Pornography: Terministic Catharsis and Definitional Argument.

Science.gov (United States)

Palczewski, Catherine Helen

2001-01-01

Focuses on the debates over the MacKinnon-Dworkin Anti-Pornography Ordinance to explore one instance of definitional argument: the attempt to effect a redefinition. Argues that advocates for a definitional shift created the possibility for a "terministic catharsis" by simultaneously locating pornography in multiple locations on the pentad,…

Understanding a sentence does not entail knowing its truth-conditions : Why the epistemological determination argument fails

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Cohnitz, Daniel; Kangilaski, Jaan

The determination argument is supposed to show that a sentence's meaning is at least a truth-condition. This argument is supposed to rest on innocent premises that even a deflationist about truth can accept. The argument comes in two versions: one is metaphysical and the other is epistemological. In

Self-similar continued root approximants

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Gluzman, S.; Yukalov, V.I.

2012-01-01

A novel method of summing asymptotic series is advanced. Such series repeatedly arise when employing perturbation theory in powers of a small parameter for complicated problems of condensed matter physics, statistical physics, and various applied problems. The method is based on the self-similar approximation theory involving self-similar root approximants. The constructed self-similar continued roots extrapolate asymptotic series to finite values of the expansion parameter. The self-similar continued roots contain, as a particular case, continued fractions and Padé approximants. A theorem on the convergence of the self-similar continued roots is proved. The method is illustrated by several examples from condensed-matter physics.

On the Formal Modeling of Games of Language and Adversarial Argumentation : A Logic-Based Artificial Intelligence Approach

OpenAIRE

Eriksson Lundström, Jenny S. Z.

2009-01-01

Argumentation is a highly dynamical and dialectical process drawing on human cognition. Successful argumentation is ubiquitous to human interaction. Comprehensive formal modeling and analysis of argumentation presupposes a dynamical approach to the following phenomena: the deductive logic notion, the dialectical notion and the cognitive notion of justified belief. For each step of an argumentation these phenomena form networks of rules which determine the propositions to be allowed to make se...

In Support of the Medical Apology: The Nonlegal Arguments.

Science.gov (United States)

Heaton, Heather A; Campbell, Ronna L; Thompson, Kristine M; Sadosty, Annie T

2016-11-01

More than 30 million people are affected annually by medical errors. Apologies can heal patients, families, and providers and, if deployed and structured appropriately, can enrich clinical encounters-yet they rarely occur. This article will address the nonlegal arguments in favor of the medical apology and discuss a structure for delivering a meaningful apology. In addition, we will review reasons why some providers feel compelled to apologize while others faced with similar circumstances do not. Medical apologies bring value to both patients and providers. Apologies can preserve therapeutic relationships and save careers for professionals by restoring their self-respect and dignity. The four R's of the ideal apology-recognition, responsibility, regret, and remedy-provide a framework to help providers apologize for unintended outcomes. When deployed and structured appropriately, apologies can heal patients, families, and providers and can enrich clinical encounters. For providers, forgiving one's self is key to professional wellbeing and continued effective practice. For patients, apologies are desirable and also serve as a conduit for often wanted emotional support from their physician. Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Argumentation and acts of language in political discourse

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Paulo Henrique Aguiar Mendes

2013-10-01

Full Text Available This paper discusses the relations between speech acts and argumentation in political discourse, considering the relevance of the dimensions of ethos, logos and pathos in engendering the most typical enunciative processes of that discursive domain.

Defining Baconian Probability for Use in Assurance Argumentation

Science.gov (United States)

Graydon, Patrick J.

2016-01-01

The use of assurance cases (e.g., safety cases) in certification raises questions about confidence in assurance argument claims. Some researchers propose to assess confidence in assurance cases using Baconian induction. That is, a writer or analyst (1) identifies defeaters that might rebut or undermine each proposition in the assurance argument and (2) determines whether each defeater can be dismissed or ignored and why. Some researchers also propose denoting confidence using the counts of defeaters identified and eliminated-which they call Baconian probability-and performing arithmetic on these measures. But Baconian probabilities were first defined as ordinal rankings which cannot be manipulated arithmetically. In this paper, we recount noteworthy definitions of Baconian induction, review proposals to assess confidence in assurance claims using Baconian probability, analyze how these comport with or diverge from the original definition, and make recommendations for future practice.

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.

Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger argument of nonlocality without inequalities for mixed states

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Ghirardi, Gian Carlo; Marinatto, Luca

2006-01-01

We generalize the Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger nonlocality without inequalities argument to cover the case of arbitrary mixed statistical operators associated to three-qubits quantum systems. More precisely, we determine the radius of a ball (in the trace distance topology) surrounding the pure GHZ state and containing arbitrary mixed statistical operators which cannot be described by any local and realistic hidden variable model and which are, as a consequence, noncompletely separable. As a practical application, we focus on certain one-parameter classes of mixed states which are commonly considered in the experimental realization of the original GHZ argument and which result from imperfect preparations of the pure GHZ state. In these cases we determine for which values of the parameter measuring the noise a nonlocality argument can still be exhibited, despite the mixedness of the considered states. Moreover, the effect of the imperfect nature of measurement processes is discussed

Galactic punctuated equilibrium: how to undermine Carter's anthropic argument in astrobiology.

Science.gov (United States)

Cirković, Milan M; Vukotić, Branislav; Dragićević, Ivana

2009-06-01

A new strategy by which to defeat Carter's "anthropic" argument against extraterrestrial life and intelligence is presented. Our approach is based on relaxing hidden uniformitarian assumptions and considering instead a dynamical succession of evolutionary regimes governed by both global (Galaxy-wide) and local (planet- or planetary system-limited) regulation mechanisms. Notably, our increased understanding of the nature of supernovae, gamma-ray bursts, and strong coupling between the Solar System and the Galaxy, and the theories of "punctuated equilibria" and "macroevolutionary regimes" are in full accordance with the regulation-mechanism picture. The application of this particular strategy highlights the limits of application of Carter's argument and indicates that, in the real universe, its applicability conditions are not satisfied. We conclude that drawing far-reaching conclusions about the scarcity of extraterrestrial intelligence and the prospects of our efforts to detect it on the basis of this argument is unwarranted.

Students' understandings of nature of science and their arguments in the context of four socio-scientific issues

Science.gov (United States)

Khishfe, Rola; Alshaya, Fahad S.; BouJaoude, Saouma; Mansour, Nasser; Alrudiyan, Khalid I.

2017-02-01

The purpose of this study was to examine students understandings about nature of science (NOS) and their arguments in context of controversial socio-scientific issue (SSI). A total of 74 11th graders in six schools in Saudi Arabia participated in the study. The instrument used was a questionnaire consisting of four scenarios addressing SSI about global warming, genetically modified food, acid rain, and human cloning. The scenarios were followed by questions relating to argumentation and NOS. Quantitative and qualitative measures were employed to analyze the data related to participants understandings of three NOS aspects (subjective, tentative, and empirical) and their arguments components (argument, counterargument, and rebuttal). Results showed no significant correlations between argument components and the NOS aspects. On the other hand, qualitative data showed that participants who generated well-developed arguments across the four SSI also exhibited more informed understandings of the NOS aspects, especially for female participants. Further, the chi-square analyses did not show significant differences in participants arguments and NOS understandings across the four scenarios. Again, the qualitative data from questionnaires showed differences in participants responses to the different scenarios. The results were interpreted along contextual factors, emotional factors, and cultural factors. Implications for the teaching of NOS and arguments were discussed.

Exploring the Argumentation Pattern in Modeling-Based Learning about Apparent Motion of Mars

Science.gov (United States)

Park, Su-Kyeong

2016-01-01

This study proposed an analytic framework for coding students' dialogic argumentation and investigated the characteristics of the small-group argumentation pattern observed in modeling-based learning. The participants were 122 second grade high school students in South Korea divided into an experimental and a comparison group. Modeling-based…

Application of validity theory and methodology to patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs): building an argument for validity.

Science.gov (United States)

Hawkins, Melanie; Elsworth, Gerald R; Osborne, Richard H

2018-07-01

Data from subjective patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are now being used in the health sector to make or support decisions about individuals, groups and populations. Contemporary validity theorists define validity not as a statistical property of the test but as the extent to which empirical evidence supports the interpretation of test scores for an intended use. However, validity testing theory and methodology are rarely evident in the PROM validation literature. Application of this theory and methodology would provide structure for comprehensive validation planning to support improved PROM development and sound arguments for the validity of PROM score interpretation and use in each new context. This paper proposes the application of contemporary validity theory and methodology to PROM validity testing. The validity testing principles will be applied to a hypothetical case study with a focus on the interpretation and use of scores from a translated PROM that measures health literacy (the Health Literacy Questionnaire or HLQ). Although robust psychometric properties of a PROM are a pre-condition to its use, a PROM's validity lies in the sound argument that a network of empirical evidence supports the intended interpretation and use of PROM scores for decision making in a particular context. The health sector is yet to apply contemporary theory and methodology to PROM development and validation. The theoretical and methodological processes in this paper are offered as an advancement of the theory and practice of PROM validity testing in the health sector.

Stacking up against Alternative Conceptions: Using Uno Cards to Introduce Discourse and Argumentation

Science.gov (United States)

Dunac, Patricia S.; Demi, Kadir

2013-01-01

We engaged secondary science students in a teacher and student constructed Uno card game (UCG) to change their conceptual understanding of the various energy transformations. The paper outlines how we incorporated Toulmin's argumentation pattern (Toulmin 1958 "The Uses of Argument"(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press)) in the UCG,…

Rowe's Argument from Improvability | Almeida | Philosophical Papers

African Journals Online (AJOL)

William Rowe has argued that if there is an infinite sequence of improving worlds then an essentially perfectly good being must actualize some world in the sequence and must not actualize any world in the sequence. Since that is impossible, there exist no perfectly good beings. I show that Rowe's argument assumes that ...

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.

When ‘national innovation system’ meet ‘varieties of capitalism’ arguments on labour qualifications: On the skill types and scientific knowledge needed for radical and incremental product innovations

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Herrmann, A.M.; Peine, A.

2012-01-01

The literatures on ‘varieties of capitalism’ (VoC) and ‘national innovation systems’ (NIS) propose very similar arguments about how firms require different types of labour qualifications to pursue strategies of radical product innovation (RPI), incremental product innovation (IPI), and product

Managing work-life policies : disruption versus dependency arguments

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Dulk, Laura den; Ruijter, Judith de

2008-01-01

What factors shape managerial attitudes towards the utilization of work-life policies? The influence of disruptiveness (Powell and Mainiero 1999) and dependency (Klein, Berman and Dickson 2000) arguments on managerial attitudes is examined using a vignette design. In this study, managers in four

Hypothetical identities : Explanatory problems for the explanatory argument

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Eronen, Markus I.

2014-01-01

Recently, several philosophers have defended an explanatory argument that supposedly provides novel empirical grounds for accepting the type identity theory of phenomenal consciousness. They claim that we are justified in believing that the type identity thesis is true because it provides the best

The Role of Self-Regulated Learning Capacities in Iranian EFL Undergraduates’ Argumentative Writing Task Performance

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Ali Akbar Khomeijani Farahani

2017-09-01

Full Text Available The current study was an attempt to explore the relationship between Iranian EFL learners’ self-regulatory capacities and their argumentative writing task performance in order to analyze measures of complexity, accuracy, and fluency (CAF. To this end, 44 Iranian EFL undergraduates majoring in English literature at the University of Tehran were recruited based on convenience sampling to participate in this study. Employing a correlational design, the participants were required to perform an argumentative writing task and complete the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire designed by Pintrich, Smith, Garcia, and McKeachie (1991. Pearson product moment correlation indicated a significant relationship between self-regulated learning and writing task performance in relation to CAF measures. In addition, the results of multiple regression showed that resource management strategies and value component predicted 56.9% of grammatical accuracy of writing task. It was also shown that resource management strategies, value, and expectancy components predicted 56.5% of lexical complexity of writing task. Lastly, cognitive and metacognitive strategies, expectancy, and value components predicted 55.2% of the fluency of writing task. The findings of this study informs EFL writing pedagogy and English language teachers and syllabus designers  with regard to the benefits of applying self-regulatory strategies in teaching and assessing writing.

The Effectiveness of a Single Intervention of Computer-Aided Argument Mapping in a Marketing and a Financial Accounting Subject

Science.gov (United States)

Carrington, Michal; Chen, Richard; Davies, Martin; Kaur, Jagjit; Neville, Benjamin

2011-01-01

An argument map visually represents the structure of an argument, outlining its informal logical connections and informing judgments as to its worthiness. Argument mapping can be augmented with dedicated software that aids the mapping process. Empirical evidence suggests that semester-length subjects using argument mapping along with dedicated…

Palliative Sedation for Existential Suffering: A Systematic Review of Argument-Based Ethics Literature.

Science.gov (United States)

Rodrigues, Paulo; Crokaert, Jasper; Gastmans, Chris

2018-06-01

Although unanimity exists on using palliative sedation (PS) for controlling refractory physical suffering in end-of-life situations, using it for controlling refractory existential suffering (PS-ES) is controversial. Complicating the debate is that definitions and terminology for existential suffering are unclear, ambiguous, and imprecise, leading to a lack of consensus for clinical practice. To systematically identify, describe, analyze, and discuss ethical arguments and concepts underpinning the argument-based bioethics literature on PS-ES. We conducted a systematic search of the argument-based bioethics literature in PubMed, CINAHL, Embase ® , The Philosopher's Index, PsycINFO ® , PsycARTICLES ® , Scopus, ScienceDirect, Web of Science, Pascal-Francis, and Cairn. We included articles published in peer-reviewed journals till December 31, 2016, written in English or French, which focused on ethical arguments related to PS-ES. We used Peer Review of Electronic Search Strategies protocol, Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses, and The Qualitative Analysis Guide of Leuven for data extraction and synthesis of themes. We identified 18 articles that met the inclusion criteria. Our analysis revealed mind-body dualism, existential suffering, refractoriness, terminal condition, and imminent death as relevant concepts in the ethical debate on PS-ES. The ethical principles of double effect, proportionality, and the four principles of biomedical ethics were used in argumentations in the PS-ES debate. There is a clear need to better define the terminology used in discussions of PS-ES and to ground ethical arguments in a more effective way. Anthropological presuppositions such as mind-body dualism underpin the debate and need to be more clearly elucidated using an interdisciplinary approach. Copyright © 2018 American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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…

Delle maniere inusuali nel trattare argomenti insoliti - Unusual ways to treat unusual arguments

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Antonio Luigi Palmisano

2012-10-01

Full Text Available All those social and political projects aiming at the promotion of justice and morality have been labelled “utopia” – even if they will not be realized – after the publication of Thomas More’s work. But a specialist of rhetoric, and a fortiori an able rhetorician such as More, connected the word topoi first of all with the meaning loci communes, just like Aristotle, Cicerone and Boezio: recurrent arguments, organized in a conventional shape, even stereotyped and functional to the construction of the oration. The persuasive tale realized by the rhetorician. And the island of More, to More’s own eyes and to the eyes and ears of his readers and listeners, was anything but a recurrent argument or stereotype, and still less an dialectic argumentation: it actually was a “non-topos”. The article also suggests that it is essentially thanks to its non dialectic style of argumentation that the actual history of utopia and utopian thought settled between philosophy and fiction, theology and politology, economy and sociology, science and science fiction.

Promovendo a argumentação no ensino superior de química Promoting argumentation in undergraduate chemistry teaching

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Luciana Passos Sá

2007-01-01

Full Text Available Studies have demonstrated the importance of argumentation in science education. Based on this assertion, we have tried to develop argumentative abilities in chemistry undergraduate students through a teaching methodology based on case studies. The process culminated with class presentations by student groups about possible solutions for the cases. To assess the quality of students' argumentation, videotapes of group presentations were collected and analyzed using Toulmin's Argument Pattern (TAP. TAP illustrates the nature of an argument in terms of claims, data, warrants, backings, and rebuttals. The findings of this work support the idea that the case study approach is an effective strategy for enhancing students' ability to argument.

AUTHORIAL VOICE IN ISLAMIC COLLEGE ENGLISH DEPARTMENT STUDENTS’ ARGUMENTATIVE WRITING

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Nur Afifi

2014-11-01

Full Text Available While considered elusive and abstract, authorial voice is paramount in English writing. Unfortunately, many of Indonesian EFL learners found it is highly challeging to show their voice in their writing. The importance of voice is even exaggerated in argumentative writing, since this kind of writing needs obvious stance of the writer. This study investigates the authorial voice students made in their argumentative writing. The purpose of this study is to gain the picture of students‟ writing ability especially in authorial voice to map the road in guiding the next writing classes. The object of the study is the argumentative writing made by English department students at one Indonesian State College of Islamic Studies in their writing III course. Using Hyland‟s interactional model of voice (2008 the data analysis results the authorial presence in the essays is in position 2 at 0 – 4 scale which means the reader feels somehow weak presence of the authorial voice in the essay. This result confirms the findings of some previous studies that EFL learners especially from „interdependent‟ cultural background tend to find this authorial voice difficult in writing English essay.

Providing Opportunities for Argumentation in Science Exam Settings

Science.gov (United States)

Swanson, Lauren; Solorza, Ruben; Fissore, Cinzia

2018-01-01

This article explores undergraduates' efforts to engage in scientific argumentation during exam settings. Thirteen undergraduate students enrolled in an environmental science course completed exams with questions linked around a central theme. Three types of questions were used, including those that prompted students to construct scientific…

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.

CLAD DEGRADATION - FEPS SCREENING ARGUMENTS

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

R. Schreiner

2004-01-01

The purpose of this report is to evaluate and document the screening of the clad degradation features, events, and processes (FEPs) with respect to modeling used to support the Total System Performance Assessment-License Application (TSPA-LA). This report also addresses the effect of certain FEPs on both the cladding and the commercial spent nuclear fuel (CSNF), DOE-owned spent nuclear fuel (DSNF), and defense high-level waste (DHLW) waste forms, as appropriate to address the effects on multiple materials and both components (FEPs 2.1.09.09.0A, 2.1.09.11.0A, 2.1.11.05.0A, 2.1.12.02.0A, and 2.1.12.03.0A). These FEPs are expected to affect the repository performance during the postclosure regulatory period of 10,000 years after permanent closure. Table 1-1 provides the list of cladding FEPs, including their screening decisions (include or exclude). The primary purpose of this report is to identify and document the analysis, screening decision, and TSPA-LA disposition (for included FEPs) or screening argument (for excluded FEPs) for these FEPs related to clad degradation. In some cases, where a FEP covers multiple technical areas and is shared with other FEP reports, this report may provide only a partial technical basis for the screening of the FEP. The full technical basis for shared FEPs is addressed collectively by the sharing FEP reports. The screening decisions and associated TSPA-LA dispositions or screening arguments from all of the FEP reports are cataloged in a project-specific FEPs database

Effects of verb-argument cues on verb production in persons with aphasia using a verb-final language

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Jee Eun Sung

2014-04-01

PWA showed greater difficulties in producing verbs with more argument structures compared to the normal group. In contrast, PWA presented significantly increased performance on the verb-completion task as the number of verb arguments increased since more cues were provided for 2- or 3-place verbs than 1-place verbs. The current results suggested that the features of more semantic and syntactic units to be activated may induce greater difficulties in retrieving verbs with more arguments, and PWA benefited from the verb-argument cues in verb production.

Promoting prevention with economic arguments – The case of Finnish occupational health services

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Suhonen Aki

2008-04-01

Full Text Available Abstract Background Both social and ethical arguments have been used to support preventive occupational health services (OHS. During the 1990s it became more common to support political argumentation for occupational health and safety by converting the consequences of ill health at work into monetary units. In addition, OHS has been promoted as a profitable investment for companies, and this aspect has been used by OHS providers in their marketing. Our intention was to study whether preventive occupational health services positively influence a company's economic performance. Methods We combined the financial statements provided by Statistics Finland and employers' reimbursement applications for occupational health services (OHS costs to the Social Insurance Institution. The data covered the years 1997, 1999 and 2001 and over 6000 companies. We applied linear regression analysis to assess whether preventive OHS had had a positive influence on the companies' economic performance after two or four years. Results Resources invested in preventive OHS were not positively related to a company's economic performance. In fact, the total cost of preventive OHS per turnover was negatively correlated to economic performance. Conclusion Even if OHS has no effect on the economic performance of companies, it may have other effects more specific to OHS. Therefore, we recommend that the evaluation of prevention in OHS should move towards outcome measures, such as sickness absence, disability pension and productivity, when applicable, both in occupational health service research and in practice at workplaces.

Lying in business : Insights from Hanna Arendt's 'Lying in Politics'

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Eenkhoorn, P.; Graafland, J.J.

2011-01-01

The political philosopher Hannah Arendt develops several arguments regarding why truthfulness cannot be counted among the political virtues. This article shows that similar arguments apply to lying in business. Based on Hannah Arendt's theory, we distinguish five reasons why lying is a structural

The non-intuitive 1/2 Thomas factor: a heuristic argument with classical electromagnetism

International Nuclear Information System (INIS)

Chrysos, M

2006-01-01

We present a heuristic argument to deduce the non-intuitive 1/2 Thomas factor for an atomic electron revolving in its orbit about the nucleus. The argument, which is simple, pedagogical and accessible to physics beginners, uses elementary notions of classical electromagnetism rather than the advanced relativity concepts which are needed in any standard textbook derivation

Fact or fallacy? Immunisation arguments in the New Zealand print media.

Science.gov (United States)

Petousis-Harris, Helen A; Goodyear-Smith, Felicity A; Kameshwar, Kamya; Turner, Nikki

2010-10-01

To explore New Zealand's four major daily newspapers' coverage of immunisation with regards to errors of fact and fallacy in construction of immunisation-related arguments. All articles from 2002 to 2007 were assessed for errors of fact and logic. Fact was defined as that which was supported by the most current evidence-based medical literature. Errors of logic were assessed using a classical taxonomy broadly based in Aristotle's classifications. Numerous errors of both fact and logic were identified, predominantly used by anti-immunisation proponents, but occasionally by health authorities. The proportion of media articles reporting exclusively fact changes over time during the life of a vaccine where new vaccines incur little fallacious reporting and established vaccines generate inaccurate claims. Fallacious arguments can be deconstructed and classified into a classical taxonomy including non sequitur and argumentum ad Hominem. Most media 'balance' given to immunisation relies on 'he said, she said' arguments using quotes from opposing spokespersons with a failure to verify the scientific validity of both the material and the source. Health professionals and media need training so that recognising and critiquing public health arguments becomes accepted practice: stronger public relations strategies should challenge poor quality articles to journalists' code of ethics and the health sector needs to be proactive in predicting and pre-empting the expected responses to introduction of new public health initiatives such as a new vaccine. © 2010 The Authors. Journal Compilation © 2010 Public Health Association of Australia.

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.

Justification and Persuasion about Cloning: Arguments in Hwang's Paper and Journalistic Reported Versions

Science.gov (United States)

Jiménez-Aleixandre, María Pilar; Federico-Agraso, Marta

2009-05-01

We examine the argumentative structure of Hwang et al.’s (2004) paper about human somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT, or ‘therapeutic cloning’), contrasted with four Journalistic Reported Versions (JRV) of it, and with students’ summaries of one JRV. As the evaluation of evidence is one of the critical features of argumentation (Jiménez-Aleixandre 2008), the analysis focuses on the use of evidence, drawing from instruments to analyze written argumentation (Kelly et al. 2008) and from studies about the structure of empirical research reports (Swales 2001). The objectives are: 1) To examine the use of evidence and the argumentative structure of Hwang et al.’s Science, 303: 1669-1674 (2004) original paper in terms of the criteria: a) pertinence of the evidence presented to the claims; b) sufficiency of the evidence for the purpose of supporting the claims; and c) coordination of the evidence across epistemic levels. 2) To explore how the structure of Hwang’s paper translates into the JRV and into university students’ perceptions about the evidence supporting the claims. The argumentative structure of Hwang’s paper is such that its apparently ostensible main claim about NT constitutes a justification for a second claim about its therapeutic applications, for which no evidence is offered. However, this second claim receives prominent treatment in the JRV and in the students’ summaries. Implications for promoting critical reading in the classroom are discussed.

Argumentative Skills Development in Teaching Philosophy to Secondary School Students through Constructive Controversy: An Exploratory Study Case

Science.gov (United States)

Morais, Teresa; Silva, Helena; Lopes, José; Dominguez, Caroline

2017-01-01

The use of argumentative strategies that promote the defense of well-grounded personal arguments contributes to the development of a critical, ethical and political thought that leads to responsible and socially committed people. Based on the quality of the produced arguments in philosophical essays, this work evaluates the potential application…

The Argument for Same-Sex Marriage

OpenAIRE

Widiss, Deborah; Tebbe, Nelson; Gilreath, Shannon

2018-01-01

159 University of Pennsylvania Law Review PENNumbra 21 (2010) Professors Tebbe and Widiss revisit the arguments they made in "Equal Access and the Right to Marry" and emphasize their belief that distinguishing between different-sex marriage and same-sex marriage is inappropriate. They lament the sustained emphasis on the equal-protection and substantive-due-process challenges in the Perry litigation and suggest that an equal-access approach is more likely to be successful on appeal. Professor...

Arguments and sources on Italian online forums on childhood vaccinations: Results of a content analysis.

Science.gov (United States)

Fadda, Marta; Allam, Ahmed; Schulz, Peter J

2015-12-16

Despite being committed to the immunization agenda set by the WHO, Italy is currently experiencing decreasing vaccination rates and increasing incidence of vaccine-preventable diseases. Our aim is to analyze Italian online debates on pediatric immunizations through a content analytic approach in order to quantitatively evaluate and summarize users' arguments and information sources. Threads were extracted from 3 Italian forums. Threads had to include the keyword Vaccin* in the title, focus on childhood vaccination, and include at least 10 posts. They had to have been started between 2008 and June 2014. High inter-coder reliability was achieved. Exploratory analysis using k-means clustering was performed to identify users' posting patterns for arguments about vaccines and sources. The analysis included 6544 posts mentioning 6223 arguments about pediatric vaccinations and citing 4067 sources. The analysis of argument posting patterns included users who published a sufficient number of posts; they generated 85% of all arguments on the forum. Dominating patterns of three groups were identified: (1) an anti-vaccination group (n=280) posted arguments against vaccinations, (2) a general pro-vaccination group (n=222) posted substantially diverse arguments supporting vaccination and (3) a safety-focused pro-vaccination group (n=158) mainly forwarded arguments that questioned the negative side effects of vaccination. The anti-vaccination group was shown to be more active than the others. They use multiple sources, own experience and media as their cited sources of information. Medical professionals were among the cited sources of all three groups, suggesting that vaccination-adverse professionals are gaining attention. Knowing which information is shared online on the topic of pediatric vaccinations could shed light on why immunization rates have been decreasing and what strategies would be best suited to address parental concerns. This suggests there is a high need for

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 ...

`Does it answer the question or is it French fries?': an exploration of language supports for scientific argumentation

Science.gov (United States)

González-Howard, María; McNeill, Katherine L.; Marco-Bujosa, Lisa M.; Proctor, C. Patrick

2017-03-01

Reform initiatives around the world are reconceptualising science education by stressing student engagement in science practices. Yet, science practices are language-intensive, requiring students to have strong receptive and productive language proficiencies. It is critical to address these rigorous language demands to ensure equitable learning opportunities for all students, including English language learners (ELLs). Little research has examined how to specifically support ELL students' engagement in science practices, such as argumentation. Using case-study methodology, we examined one middle school science teacher's instructional strategies as she taught an argumentation-focused curriculum in a self-contained ELL classroom. Findings revealed that three trends characterized the teacher's language supports for the structural and dialogic components of argumentation: (1) more language supports focused on argument structure, (2) dialogic interactions were most often facilitated by productive language supports, and (3) some language supports offered a rationale for argumentation. Findings suggest a need to identify and develop supports for the dialogic aspects of argumentation. Furthermore, engaging students in argumentation through productive language functions could be leveraged to support dialogic interactions. Lastly, our work points to the need for language supports that make the rationale for argumentation explicit since such transparency could further increase access for all students.

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,” ...

ArguBlogging: An Application for the Argument Web

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Bex, Floris; Snaith, Mark; Lawrence, John; Reed, Chris

2014-01-01

In this paper, we present a software tool for ‘ArguBlogging’, which allows users to construct debate and discussions across blogs, linking existing and new online resources to form distributed, structured conversations. Arguments and counterarguments can be posed by giving opinions on one’s own blog

Fundamentals of legal argumentation : A survey of theories on the justification of legal decisions

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Feteris, E.T.

2017-01-01

This book is an updated and revised edition of Fundamentals of Legal Argumentation published in 1999. It discusses new developments that have taken place in the past 15 years in research of legal argumentation, legal justification and legal interpretation, as well as the implications of these new

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…

Automatic Predicate Argument Analysis of the Penn TreeBank

National Research Council Canada - National Science Library

Palmer, Martha; Rosenzweig, Joseph; Cotton, Scott

2001-01-01

... had/presided over a meeting/conference with B There are several different lexical items that can be used to refer to the same type of event, and several different predicate argument patterns that can be...

Stability of oscillatory solutions of differential equations with a general piecewise constant argument

Directory of Open Access Journals (Sweden)

Kuo-Shou Chiu

2011-11-01

Full Text Available We examine scalar differential equations with a general piecewise constant argument, in short DEPCAG, that is, the argument is a general step function. Criteria of existence of the oscillatory and nonoscillatory solutions of such equations are proposed. Necessary and sufficient conditions for stability of the zero solution are obtained. Appropriate examples are given to show our results.

Investigating Instruction for Improving Revision of Argumentative Essays

Science.gov (United States)

Butler, Jodie A.; Britt, M. Anne

2011-01-01

Students are expected to come into the current college classroom already possessing certain skills including the ability to write at the appropriate academic level regardless of discipline and the ability to create well-structured arguments. Research indicates, however, that most students entering college are underprepared in both areas. One…

Objectivity and Subjectivity: an Argument for Rethinking the ...

African Journals Online (AJOL)

Objectivity and Subjectivity: an Argument for Rethinking the Philosophy Syllabus. ... South African Journal of Philosophy ... The aftermath of the rise of modern physics has been a picture of reality as alienated from our commonly experienced sense of purposes, aims, and intentions as defining our everyday lives, what we ...

Personal Dualism and the Argument from Differential Vagueness ...

African Journals Online (AJOL)

In Causing Actions, Pietroski defends a distinctive view of the relationship between mind and body which he calls Personal Dualism. Central to his defence is the Argument from Differential Vagueness. It moves from the claim that mental events have different vagueness of spatiotemporal boundaries from neural events to ...

Lying in Business : Insights from Hannah Arendt’s ‘Lying in Politics’

NARCIS (Netherlands)

Eenkhoorn, P.; Graafland, J.J.

2010-01-01

The famous political philosopher Hannah Arendt develops several arguments why truthfulness cannot be counted among the political virtues. This article shows that similar arguments apply to lying in business. Based on Hannah Arendt’s theory, we distinguish five reasons why lying is a structural

The role of probability arguments in the history of science.

Science.gov (United States)

Weinert, Friedel

2010-03-01