From Theory of Rhetoric to the Practice of Language Use: The Case of Appeals to Ethos Elements

@article{Koszowy2022FromTO,
  title={From Theory of Rhetoric to the Practice of Language Use: The Case of Appeals to Ethos Elements},
  author={Marcin Koszowy and Katarzyna Budzynska and Martin Pereira-Fari{\~n}a and Rory Duthie},
  journal={Argumentation},
  year={2022},
  volume={36},
  pages={123-149}
}
In their book Commitment in Dialogue , Walton and Krabbe claim that formal dialogue systems for conversational argumentation are “not very realistic and not easy to apply”. This difficulty may make argumentation theory less well adapted to be employed to describe or analyse actual argumentation practice. On the other hand, the empirical study of real-life arguments may miss or ignore insights of more than the two millennia of the development of philosophy of language, rhetoric, and… 

From Theory of Rhetoric to the Practice of Language Use: The Case of Appeals to Ethos Elements

In their book Commitment in Dialogue, Walton and Krabbe claim that formal dialogue systems for conversational argumentation are “not very realistic and not easy to apply”. This difficulty may make

Argumentation and Identity: A Normative Evaluation of the Arguments of Delegates to the COP26 UN Climate Change Conference

Arguments may sometimes be advanced with a non-standard function. One such function, it is suggested, is the expression of identity, a practice which may play a significant role in political

Conventional Implicatures in Argumentation

Despite the ubiquity of conventional implicatures in language and the critical role they play in argumentation, they have heretofore been almost entirely absent from theories of argument and the

“Agreement Builds and Disagreement Destroys:” How Polish Undergraduates and Graduates Understand Interpersonal Arguing

This is a descriptive study (N = 243) of how Polish undergraduates and graduates perceive face to face arguing. We had some reasons to suppose that they would not be especially aggressive. The Polish

Towards a Holistic View on Argument Quality Prediction

Grounded on rich results from thorough empirical evaluations, this work assesses the generalization capabilities of argument quality estimation across diverse domains, the interplay with related argument mining tasks, and the impact of emotions on perceived argument strength.

References

SHOWING 1-10 OF 24 REFERENCES

Ethotic arguments and fallacies: The credibility function in multi-agent dialogue systems

In this paper, it is shown how formal dialectic can be extended to model multi-agent argumentation in which each participant is an agent. An agent is viewed as a participant in a dialogue who not

Framing fracking

An empirical methodology (macroscope) is provided that identifies, from large quantities of text data through semantic frame analysis, the many players, positions and places presumed relevant to argumentation in a controversy.

Annotating Argument Schemes

The annotation of the preexisting US2016 corpus of televised election debates is extended, resulting in the two largest consistently annotated corpora of schemes in argumentative dialogue publicly available.

Deference, Distrust, and Delegation: Three Design Hypotheses

Design thinking in argumentation involves speculative inquiry into alternative ways of carrying out the broad human project of becoming more reasonable. Design inquiry may or may not be accompanied

Strategies of Character Attack

Why are personal attacks so powerful? In political debates, speeches, discussions and campaigns, negative character judgments, aggressive charges and charged epithets are used for different purposes.

Experts: Which Ones Should You Trust?

1. Expertise and Testimony Mainstream epistemology is a highly theoretical and abstract enterprise. Traditional epistemologists rarely present their deliberations as critical to the practical

Epistemic and Deontic Authority in the Argumentum Ad Verecundiam

The aim of this paper is to elaborate tools that would allow us to analyse arguments from authority and guard against fallacious uses of them. To accomplish this aim, we extend the list of

A comparative study of political communication in televised pre-election debates in Poland and the United States of America

Abstract This paper combines quantitative and qualitative methodologies to study the persuasive strategies employed by candidates taking part in televised pre-election debates in Poland and the

Throwing The Baby Out With The Water: From Reasonably Scrutinizing Authorities To Rampant Scepticism About Expertise

In this paper, I argue that many arguments from expert opinion are strong arguments. Therefore, in many cases it is rational to rely on experts since in many cases the fact that an expert says that p

The Legitimacy Crisis of Arguments from Expert Opinion: Can’t We Trust Experts?

Recent disputes (Mizrahi in Inform Logic 33(1):57–79, 2013; Mizrahi in Inform Logic 36(2):238–252, 2016; Mizrahi in Argumentation 32(2):175–195, 2018; Seidel in Inform Logic 34(2):192–218, 2014;