Dishonest Arguments in Debate Games
نویسنده
چکیده
COMMA 2012, Vienna " The science of Dialectic, in one sense of the word, is mainly concerned to tabulate and analyse dishonest stratagems " Arthur Schopenhauer, The Art of Controversy (1896)
منابع مشابه
Debate Games in Logic Programming
A debate game provides an abstract model of debates between two players based on the formal argumentation framework. This paper presents a method of realizing debate games in logic programming. Two players have their knowledge bases represented by extended logic programs and build claims using arguments associated with those programs. A player revises its knowledge base with arguments posed by ...
متن کاملAbduction in Argumentation Frameworks and Its Use in Debate Games
This paper studies an abduction problem in formal argumentation frameworks. Given an argument, an agent verifies whether the argument is justified or not in its argumentation framework. If the argument is not justified, the agent seeks conditions to explain the argument in its argumentation framework. We formulate such abductive reasoning in argumentation semantics and provide its computation i...
متن کاملOn a Formal Treatment of Deception in Argumentative Dialogues
This paper formalizes a dialogue that includes dishonest arguments in persuasion. We propose a dialogue model that uses a predicted opponent model and define a protocol using this prediction with an abstract argumentation framework. We focus on deception as dishonesty; that is, the case in which an agent hides her knowledge. We define the concepts of dishonest argument and suspicious argument b...
متن کاملReacting to Unfairness: Group Identity and Dishonest Behavior
We experimentally investigate whether individuals are more likely to engage in dishonest behavior after having experienced unfairness perpetrated by an individual with a salient group identity. Two individuals generate an endowment together, but only one can decide how to share it. They either share the same group identity or have distinct group identities. Then, they approach a task in which t...
متن کاملDebates and Decisions: On a Rationale of Argumentation Rules
Ž We view a debate as a mechanism by which an uninformed decision maker the . listener extracts information from two informed debaters, who hold contradicting positions regarding the right decision. During the debate, the debaters raise arguments and, based on these arguments, the listener reaches a conclusion. Using a simple example, we investigate the mechanism design problem of constructing ...
متن کامل