Argumentation as a metacognitive skill of passing acceptance

Automated decision-making is a significant concern for the AI community and especially for multi-agent systems. Although it has long been known among scholars of rhetoric that human decision-making can be systematically influenced by skillful argumentation, there seems to be a lack of formalizations which handle the impact rhetoric has on the concealment of logical fallacies to the human mind. In this paper, we highlight the need of metacognition for the successful formal representation and interpretation of human argumentation and thus successful automated decision-making. The relevance of such investigations is illustrated with a real-world example taken from the discourse of neuroscience.