Argument Mapping and Teaching Critical Thinking APA Chicago April 17/08

1
Argument Mapping and Teaching Critical Thinking
APA Chicago April 17/08

• Douglas Walton CRRAR
• Centre for Research in Reasoning, Argumentation
  Rhetoric U. of Windsor

2
Wikipedia entry on Diagramming
Diagramming software consists of computer
programs that are used to produce graphical
diagrams. edit Types of diagramming
software User-generated diagrams. As computer
users seek to represent visual information, such
as a flowchart, tools such as Schematic,
SmartDraw, Dia, OmniGraffle, Microsoft Visio,
Inspiration, ConceptDraw 7, allow them to express
the information in the form of a diagram. Such
programs are usually GUI-based and feature
WYSIWYG diagram editing. There are also several
diagramming tools available for developers, such
as JGraph for the Java platform. Some
user-generated diagram software is UML
compatible, allowing model-driven translation
between graphic representation and functional
programming languages. Automatically generated
diagrams. Programs are available as debugger
front-ends, computer-aided software engineering
(CASE) tools, or profilers. Diagrams are usually
automatically generated by the program.
3
The Discussion on Tipping
4
Araucaria
Araucaria is a software tool for analyzing
arguments. It
aids a user in reconstructing and diagramming an
argument using a simple point-and-click
interface. The
software also supports argumentation schemes, and
provides a user-customizable set of schemes with
which
to analyze arguments.
Once arguments have been analyzed they can be
saved in
a portable format called "AML", the Argument
Markup
Language, which is based on XML.
http//www.computing.
dundee
.ac.
uk
/staff/creed/araucaria/
5
Screen Shot of Araucaria Window
6
Argument from Expert Opinion
7
Key List for Dr. Phil Example
8
Diagram of Dr. Phil Example
9
Carneades A New Argumentation System

• The Carneades system for reasoning with
  argumentation schemes is a computational model
  that builds on ontologies from the semantic web
  to provide a platform for employing argumentation
  schemes in legal reasoning. The model is an
  abstract functional specification of a computer
  program that can be implemented in any
  programming language. It defines structures for
  representing various elements of argumentation,
  and shows how they function together in
  arguments. Arguments in the Carneades system can
  be visualized using an argument diagram because
  the basic structure it uses, the model of the
  semantic web, is that of the directed labeled
  graph.
• Thomas F. Gordon, Henry Prakken and Douglas
  Walton, The Carneades Model of Argument and
  Burden of Proof, Artificial Intelligence, 171,
  2007, 875-896.

10
Argument from Expert Opinion in Carneades
11
Enthymemes

• Enthymemes are arguments with missing premises.
• These are premises that were not explicitly
  stated in the text, but are needed or used in the
  argument.
• Sometimes the missing part can be the conclusion.
• Sometimes an argumentation scheme can help to
  identify a missing part.

12
Instrumental Scheme for Practical Reasoning

• I have a goal G.
• Bringing about A is necessary (or sufficient) for
  me to bring about G.
• Therefore, I should (practically ought to) bring
  about A.

13
Scheme for Value-based Practical Reasoning

• I have a goal G.
• G is supported by my set of values, V.
• Bringing about A is necessary (or sufficient) for
  me to bring about G.
• Therefore, I should (practically ought to) bring
  about A.

14
The Scalpicin Example

• Harry has an itchy scalp. He needs Scalpicin.
  Explicit argument in TV commercial
• Harry needs something that would make his scalp
  no longer itchy assumption.
• Scalpicin would make his scalp no longer itchy
  assumption.
• An itchy scalp is a bad condition or problem
  (negative value) assumption.
• A bad condition is something that should be
  removed if possible assumption.

15
Diagram for the Scalpicin Example
16
Three Bases for the Enthymeme

• Argumentation Schemes
• Common Knowledge
• Commitment
• Using argument diagrams is a way to bring all
  three bases together and find the missing
  premises or conclusions in a given case.
• Douglas Walton, The Three Bases for the
  Enthymeme A Dialogical Theory, Journal of
  AppliedLogic, www.uwinnipeg.ca/walton

17
The Animal Freedom Example

• Animals in captivity are freer than in nature.
• Claim made conclusion of argument
• There are no natural predators to kill animals
  that are in captivity.
• Reason given to support claim premise
• What are the missing premises?

18
Implicit Premises

• There are natural predators to kill animals that
  are in nature.
• Implicit assumption based on common knowledge
• If animals are in a place where there are no
  natural predators to kill them, they are freer
  than if they are in a place where there are
  natural predators to kill them.
• Arguers commitment

19
The Animal Freedom Diagram
20
References

• Glenn Rowe, Fabrizio Macagno, Chris Reed and Doug
  Walton, Araucaria as a Tool for Diagramming
  Arguments in Teaching and Studying Philosophy,
  Teaching Philosophy, 29, 2006, 111-124.
• Chris Reed, Douglas Walton and Fabrizio Macagno,
  Argument Diagramming in Logic, Law and
  Artificial Intelligence, Knowledge Engineering
  Review, 22, 2007, 87-109.
• Thomas F. Gordon, Henry Prakken and Douglas
  Walton, The Carneades Model of Argument and
  Burden of Proof, Artificial Intelligence, 171,
  2007, 875-896.
• Douglas Walton, The Three Bases for the
  Enthymeme A Dialogical Theory, Journal of
  Applied Logic, to appear. 2008.
• All these papers are available as pdf files on
  the website of Douglas Walton
  www.uwinnipeg.ca/walton