Teleological argumentation to and from motives
نویسنده
چکیده
This paper uses tools from argumentation and artificial intelligence to build a system to analyse reasoning from a motive to an action and reasoning from circumstantial evidence of actions to a motive. The tools include argument mapping, argumentation schemes, inference to the best explanation and a hybrid method of combining argument and explanation. Several examples of use of relevant motive evidence in law are used to illustrate how the system works. It is shown how adjudicating cases where motive of evidence is relevant depends on a balance of argumentation that can be tilted to one side or the other using plausible reasoning that combines arguments and explanations.
منابع مشابه
The Pragma-Dialectical Analysis and Evaluation of Teleological Argumentation in a Legal Context
In this article the author develops a framework for a pragma-dialectical reconstruction of teleological argumentation in a legal context. Ideas taken from legal theory are integrated in a pragma-dialectical model for analyzing and evaluating argumentation, thus providing a more systematic and elaborate framework for assessing the quality of teleological arguments in a legal context. Teleologica...
متن کاملExtracting and Understanding Arguments about Motives from Stories
In this paper, we discuss how Value-based Argumentation can be used as a tool in human and computer story understanding, especially where understanding the story requires understanding of the motives of its characters. It is shown how arguments about motives can be extracted from stories, and how dialogues about these arguments can aid in story understanding.
متن کاملWeighing and Balancing in the Justification of Judicial Decisions
In legal theory, it is widely claimed that decisions in hard cases are based on weighing and balancing. However no reconstructions are given of the deep structure of the complex argumenation underlying the justification of these decisions. The author develops a model for the analysis of weighing and balancing of arguments in the justification of judicial decisions that are based on teleological...
متن کاملIs There Really an Evolved Capacity for Number?
Humans and other species have biologically endowed abilities for discriminating quantities. A widely accepted view sees such abilities as an evolved capacity specific for number and arithmetic. This view, however, is based on an implicit teleological rationale, builds on inaccurate conceptions of biological evolution, downplays human data from non-industrialized cultures, overinterprets results...
متن کاملUnderstanding narratives with argumentation
In this paper, we show two important connections between computational models of narrative and computational models of argumentation. First, we show how argumentation techniques can be applied to enrich story understanding, especially where an understanding the story requires understanding of the motives of its characters. This also helps to explain how stories can themselves be seen as as argu...
متن کامل