Advanced

Reasoning, Argumentation: Insights from the Wild

Zenker, Frank LU (2018) In Logic and Logical Philosophy 27(4). p.421-451
Abstract
This article provides a brief selective overview and discussion of recent research into natural language argumentation that may inform the study of human reasoning on the assumption that an episode of argumentation issues an invitation to accept a corresponding inference. As this research shows, arguers typically seek to establish new consequences based on prior information. And they typically do so vis-à-vis a real or an imagined opponent, or an opponent-position, in ways that remain sensitive to considerations of context, audiences, and goals. Deductively valid inferences remain a limiting case of such reasoning. In view of these insights, it may appear less surprising that allegedly “irrational” behavior can regularly be produced in... (More)
This article provides a brief selective overview and discussion of recent research into natural language argumentation that may inform the study of human reasoning on the assumption that an episode of argumentation issues an invitation to accept a corresponding inference. As this research shows, arguers typically seek to establish new consequences based on prior information. And they typically do so vis-à-vis a real or an imagined opponent, or an opponent-position, in ways that remain sensitive to considerations of context, audiences, and goals. Deductively valid inferences remain a limiting case of such reasoning. In view of these insights, it may appear less surprising that allegedly “irrational” behavior can regularly be produced in experimental settings that expose subjects to standardized reasoning tasks.
(Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
keywords
argumentation, fallacy, inference, reasoning
in
Logic and Logical Philosophy
volume
27
issue
4
pages
421 - 451
publisher
Nicolaus Copernicus University
external identifiers
  • scopus:85057177503
ISSN
1425-3305
DOI
10.12775/LLP.2017.029
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
92184651-26be-4224-9608-2f97e7f19ed5
date added to LUP
2018-01-31 10:57:15
date last changed
2018-12-09 04:37:01
@article{92184651-26be-4224-9608-2f97e7f19ed5,
  abstract     = {This article provides a brief selective overview and discussion of recent research into natural language argumentation that may inform the study of human reasoning on the assumption that an episode of argumentation issues an invitation to accept a corresponding inference. As this research shows, arguers typically seek to establish new consequences based on prior information. And they typically do so vis-à-vis a real or an imagined opponent, or an opponent-position, in ways that remain sensitive to considerations of context, audiences, and goals. Deductively valid inferences remain a limiting case of such reasoning. In view of these insights, it may appear less surprising that allegedly “irrational” behavior can regularly be produced in experimental settings that expose subjects to standardized reasoning tasks.<br/>},
  author       = {Zenker, Frank},
  issn         = {1425-3305},
  keyword      = {argumentation,fallacy,inference,reasoning},
  language     = {eng},
  number       = {4},
  pages        = {421--451},
  publisher    = {Nicolaus Copernicus University},
  series       = {Logic and Logical Philosophy},
  title        = {Reasoning, Argumentation: Insights from the Wild},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.12775/LLP.2017.029},
  volume       = {27},
  year         = {2018},
}