Exploring Argumentation Schemes Used in Discussing Controversial Social Issues
Résumé
Argumentation schemes aim at representing the structure of common types of arguments used in everyday discourses. In addition to identifying a type of argumentation (e.g. "Argument from analogy,""Argument from expert opinion"), they also indicate generic version of the premise(s) and conclusion for each scheme. One of the most significant features of argumentation schemes is the inclusion of critical questions, that enable a respondent to question the content put forward by the proponent, and therefore lead to the validation or defeat of the argument; for example, for the scheme Argument from expert opinion, one of the critical questions is: "How credible is the expert cited as an expert source?". Modern research on argumentation schemes include defeasible arguments, i.e. arguments that are not strictly speaking logically valid, but are strong enough for their conclusion to be temporarily accepted, until further evidence can be put forward. These types of arguments are especially common in natural language.