To overcome the crisis in the sphere of argumentation studies, the project proposes a logical-cognitive concept of argumentation which is a compound formalized theory that includes formalisms for modeling argumentation of different types, a relevant conceptual framework and a methodology for the use of scientific research in the practice. Three types of argumentation are defined: theoretical (two types) and practical. Theoretical argumentation is a critical discussion of the agents’ knowledge and opinions about facts aimed to substantiate a certain view or to change it – i.e. persuasion. Practical argumentation is a critical discussion of opinions about actions which includes, in addition to the statements about knowledge and opinions, statements of a non-descriptive nature about the agents’ values and intentions to adhere to a certain line of behavior. The study of argumentation needs to focus on the large structures that reflect specifics of the criticism and defense of the positions of the parties. An atom unit of such study is the argument as a statement of reason, while its molecular elements are the argumentative structure of a dispute (frame), a multitude of arguments that express the parties’ positions, a multitude of the agents’ knowledge and opinions that act as the bases for the formation of positions, lines of behavior, etc. Within the framework of this trend, both indefeasible (deductive) and defeasible argumentations can be studied. The argumentation effectiveness can be assessed based on the procedural semantics and using analogues of such logical notions as consistency and completeness. Modern approaches to the argumentation, including those claiming the compound status, can be classified using two methods: based on the substantive and practical criteria. Importance of the research outcomes amounts to the theoretical and methodological role of the new conception of argumentation and the general “umbrella” term argumentation that allows systematizing the manifold research and educational approaches and concepts in this field and is associated with communicative nature of modern social life where efficiency and social success rely on argumentative and narrative competences.
Делиберативная аргументация находит широкое применение в различных областях деятельности человека. В современном информационном обществе применение методов делиберативной аргументации связано с разработкой и использованием соответствующего прикладного программного обеспечения, которое предназначено для визуализации и моделирования интеллектуальной деятельности по решению различного рода практических задач, а также аргументации. При этом в различном программном обеспечении, предназначенном для моделирования и репрезентации аргументации, явно или неявно заложены её концептуальные основания аргументации. В настоящем исследовании на основе выявления программного обеспечения, предназначенного для моделирования делиберативной аргументации, анализа его назначения и основных функций определяются концептуальные основания их функционирования, что является начальным этапом для формулирования корпуса критериев оценки данного программного обеспечения и его последующей классификации.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.