A normative theory of argument strength

@article{Hahn2008ANT,
  title={A normative theory of argument strength},
  author={U. Hahn and M. Oaksford},
  journal={Informal Logic},
  year={2008},
  volume={26},
  pages={1-24}
}
In this article, we argue for the general importance of normative theories of argument strength. We also provide some evidence based on our recent work on the fallacies as to why Bayesian probability might, in fact, be able to supply such an account. In the remainder of the article we discuss the general characteristics that make a specifically Bayesian approach desirable, and critically evaluate putative flaws of Bayesian probability that have been raised in the argumentation literature. 
A normative framework for argument quality: argumentation schemes with a Bayesian foundation
Truth and the virtue of arguments
The rationality of informal argumentation: a Bayesian approach to reasoning fallacies.
Argument Content and Argument Source: An Exploration
Normative theories of argumentation: are some norms better than others?
A Probability Logical Interpretation of Fallacies
A probabilistic analysis of argument cogency
Evidence and Argument Evaluation
On Argument Strength
...
1
2
3
4
...

References

SHOWING 1-10 OF 93 REFERENCES
A Bayesian approach to the argument from ignorance.
  • M. Oaksford, U. Hahn
  • Psychology, Medicine
  • Canadian journal of experimental psychology = Revue canadienne de psychologie experimentale
  • 2004
Epistemic Normativity, Argumentation, and Fallacies
Logics for Defeasible Argumentation
Relevance in argumentation
...
1
2
3
4
5
...