Tuesday, 11 March 2008

41, Real Arguments are Approximate Arguments

Contents of 'Real Arguments are Approximate Arguments' (2007) by Anthony Hunter

... real arguments (i.e. arguments presented by humans) usually do not have enough explicitly presented premises for the entailment of the claim. This is because there is some common knowledge that can be assumed by a proponent of an argument and the recipient of it. This allows the proponent of an argument to encode an argument into a real argument by ignoring the common knowledge, and it allows a recipient of a real argument to decode it into an argument by drawing on the common knowledge. If both the proponent and recipient use the same common knowledge, then this process is straightforward. Unfortunately, this is not always the case, and raises the need for an approximation of the notion of an argument for the recipient to cope with the disparities between the different views on what constitutes common knowledge.


... Real arguments (i.e. those presented by people in general) are normally enthymemes... An enthymeme only explicitly represents some of the premises for entailing its claim...

Logical Argumentation

Approximate Arguments

Framework for Real Arguments

Generalizing Argument Trees

Sequences of Real Arguments

Decoding Enthymemes

Quality of Enthymemes


No comments: