Reasoned Use of Expertise in Argumentation
نویسنده
چکیده
This article evaluates the strengths and weaknesses of arguments based on appeals to expertise. The intersection of two areas is explored: (i) the traditional argumentum ad verecundiam (literally, "appeal to modesty;" but characteristically the appeal to the authority of expert judgment) in informal logic, and (ii) the uses of expert systems in artificial intelligence. The article identifies a model of practical reasoning that underlies the logic of expert systems and the model of argument appropriate for the informal logic of the argumentum ad verecundiam.
منابع مشابه
‘Cognitive systemic dichotomization’ in public argumentation and controversies
We describe and analyze an important cognitive obstacle in interand intra-community argumentation processes, which we propose to call 'Cognitive Systemic Dichotomization' (CSD). This social phenomenon consists in the collective use of shared cognitive patterns based upon dichotomous schematization of knowledge, values, and affection. We discuss the formative role of CSD on a community’s collect...
متن کاملValidation study of the extended theory of reasoned action questionnaire for drug abuse prevention in adolescents
The aim of this study was to design and assess the validity and reliability of the theory of reasoned action extended version questionnaire for drug abuse avoidance in Iranian male adolescents. Validity and reliability of a measure consisting of TRA and self efficacy construct for substance abuse avoidance was assessed by scientific methods. Cross-sectional data was collected via self-admini...
متن کاملFactors related to cosmetic surgery based on theory of reasoned action in shahrekord students
Abstract Introduction: Recently cosmetic surgery has been popular in Iran, in the previous years the age of demanding has decreased considerably. Intension to undergo cosmetic surgery not only depends on social sources but also the factors such as psychological, familiar, cultural were influence too. Objective: The aim of this study was to assess attitude, subjective norms and external fa...
متن کاملModelling Group Decision Simulation through Argumentation
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, ...
متن کاملRapid Argumentation Capture from Analysis Reports: The Case Study of Aum Shinrikyo
The availability of subject matter experts has always been a challenge for the development of knowledge-based cognitive assistants incorporating their expertise. This paper presents an approach to rapidly develop cognitive assistants for evidence-based reasoning by capturing and operationalizing the expertise that was already documented in analysis reports. It illustrates the approach with the ...
متن کامل