Evaluating Arguments: The Premise-Conclusion Relation

A conclusion based on an unwise premise.

Conclusion : Re - evaluating Eclecticism

When looking at the original data analysis, we see a variety of approaches used to examine the discourse data of focus. The analysis is rich and includes a wide array of features. Conversely, the three single perspective analyses conducted for this Forum each drew upon different linguistic details to support their conclusions with different insights. It is important to consider how different ap...

Generating and evaluating evaluative arguments

Evaluative arguments are pervasive in natural human communication. In countless situations people attempt to advise or persuade their interlocutors that something is desirable (vs. undesirable) or right (vs. wrong). With the proliferation of on-line systems serving as personal advisors and assistants, there is a pressing need to develop general and testable computational models for generating a...

Mining Argumentative Structure from Natural Language text using Automatically Generated Premise-Conclusion Topic Models

This paper presents a method of extracting argumentative structure from natural language text. The approach presented is based on the way in which we understand an argument being made, not just from the words said, but from existing contextual knowledge and understanding of the broader issues. We leverage highprecision, low-recall techniques in order to automatically build a large corpus of inf...

Evaluating arguments based on Toulmin’s scheme

Toulmin’s argument scheme (1958) represents an influential tool for the analysis of arguments. The scheme enriches the traditional premises-conclusion model of arguments by distinguishing additional elements, like warrant, backing and rebuttal. The present paper contains a formal elaboration of Toulmin’s scheme, and extends it with a treatment of the formal evaluation of Toulmin-style arguments...