Pokrewne

Start
Baldacci, David Sean King 02 Mit jedem Schlag der Stunde
Anthony Price [David Audley Other Paths to Glory (epub)
B V Larson [Star Force 11] David VanDyke (epub)
Baddiel, David Was man so Liebe nennt
Anthony Price [David Audley 1 The Memory Trap (epub)
Baldacci David Klub Wielblado Kolekcjonerzy tajemnic
Don't Get Too Comfortable The I David Rakoff
Brin David Wspomaganie 003 Wojna Wspomoganych
Doctor Who The Wages of Sin David A. McIntee
Benford, Gregory u Brin, David Im Herzen des Kometen

[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
.This consideration will lead into a discussion of the nature of issues, means of identifying issues in a specific case, and why addressing the issues meets the initial burden of proof.The lecture then shifts from responsibilities to choices and focuses on the arguer’s options with respect to selection and arrangement of arguments.Lectures Eight through Ten concern the processes of attacking and defending arguments, processes that collectively are known as refutation.We begin by considering the key concept of stasis.This concept refers to the focal point of the argument, which is created by the confrontation of assertion and denial.The first step in responding to an argument, then, is to identify the desired stasis.This lecture explores how different choices about stasis affect argument, both in the legal setting in which it was originally devised and in nonlegal arguments as well.©2005 The Teaching Company Limited Partnership1Lecture Nine introduces the processes of attack and defense, pointing out that, despite the military metaphor, these are cooperative activities.Choices regarding the selection of arguments for attack and the development of the attack are considered in some detail.Lecture Ten completes the discussion of attacks, then examines the process of defending and rebuilding arguments, in which the choices available to the advocate are far fewer.The lecture concludes with general techniques of refutation that can be used both by the attack and by the defense.The treatment of argument strategy and tactics concludes with Lecture Eleven, which is devoted entirely to the role of language in argument.By considering the role of definitions, figures of speech, precision, and intensity, the lecture establishes that language is integral to argument, not ornamentation that is added to language-free content.In the next set of seven lectures, Lectures Twelve through Eighteen, the focus shifts from argument strategy and tactics to the more microscopic level, in which specific components of the individual argument are the units of analysis, and the goals are to examine how the components are used and which factors of each component may strengthen or undermine the argument in which it is used.A single lecture examines evidence, which is discussed with reference to examples, statistical measures, objective data and historical documents, and testimony.Then six lectures address different kinds of inferences and warrants.These are especially important because they are the most complex parts of the argument and designate different argument schemes.Six different inferential patterns are examined carefully—example, analogy, sign, cause, commonplaces, and form.In each case, the lectures explain that the inference depends on probability rather than certainty.The basic pattern of the inference is described, its uses are considered, and tests are offered that help to determine whether the inference is likely to be sound.Unlike deductive reasoning, in which the soundness of an argument is a purely formal question, in argumentation the soundness of an inference is governed heavily by context and experience.After presentation of these six basic patterns of inductive inference, several hybrid inferential patterns are considered in Lecture Eighteen—reasoning with rules, reasoning about values, and dissociations.Because the goal in constructing arguments is to have not only some sort of reasoning structure but one that will influence critical listeners, the appraisal of arguments becomes the focus of Lectures Nineteen and Twenty.These lectures offer different approaches to the question, “What makes an argument valid?” Lecture Nineteen introduces the concept of validity by reference to formal argument, then considers what errors in each of the six informal inference patterns will make an argument invalid, and finally considers general errors of vacuity that result in“empty” arguments.Lecture Twenty resumes consideration of general fallacies by considering fallacies of clarity (the use of unclear or equivocal language) and fallacies of relevance (drawing inferences from factors having nothing to do with the relationship between evidence and claim).It then circles back on the concept of fallacy by showing that supposedly fallacious inferences are sometimes valid, depending on the context, and by suggesting that validity may be more a matter of procedure than of form.In this view, valid arguments are those that enhance the purpose of resolving disagreement.Examples are offered of normative standards for arguments that follow from this position.The final group of lectures moves to an even more macro level and considers the practice of argumentation in society.Lecture Twenty-One presents the concept of argument spheres in which different expectations shape the culture of arguing.It then addresses the nature of argumentation in the personal sphere.Lecture Twenty-Two is devoted to the technical sphere, where argumentation takes place in specialized fields.The concept of argument field is presented, and examples are drawn from the fields of law, science, management, ethics, and religion.Lecture Twenty-Three deals with the public sphere, in which matters of general interest are discussed, and the public participates in its capacity as citizenry.This lecture also explores the relationship between a robust public sphere and a healthy democracy.Finally, Lecture Twenty-Four returns to the level of generality with which the series began and considers how arguments terminate and then explores the larger goals served by argumentation as a process of human interaction.Most significantly, argumentation is a means of collective judgment and decision making, and hence of governance.It also is a way of knowing and a means to the achievement of the goals of democratic life.As the conclusion notes, although it is sometimes thought fashionable to demean an argument culture as inimical to harmony and civil peace, a culture of argumentation is actually something to be embraced in a world in which important decisions must be made under conditions of uncertainty.2©2005 The Teaching Company Limited PartnershipLecture OneIntroducing Argumentation and RhetoricScope: In everyday usage, argumentation often has negative connotations, suggesting quarrelsomeness and unpleasantness.We must put this stereotype aside and examine argumentation in its classical sense—as the study of effective reasoning.This introductory lecture will explain just what this idea means.It also will relate argumentation to the field of rhetoric.Rhetoric is another term that has taken on pejorative connotations but that has a rich history as the study of how messages influence people.Argumentation is also related to two other fields, logic and dialectic, that will be explained in this lecture.We also will consider the question of how argumentation is ethical.With a clear understanding of these basic terms, we will be ready to launch our study, and the lecture will preview the directions we will take.OutlineI.Argumentation is the study of effective reasoning.A.Popular conceptions of argumentation as unpleasant and quarrelsome need to be set aside.B [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]