Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Schemes may aid in argument identification because they describe factors that distinguish the argument type from other text. For example, an argument from expert opinion refers to an expert and a field of expertise, both of which could be identified in a text. Some schemes contain more easily distinguished characteristics than others.
The purpose of argumentation (also called persuasive writing) is to prove the validity of an idea, or point of view, by presenting sound reasoning, discussion, and argument to thoroughly convince the reader. Persuasive writing/persuasion is a type of argumentation with the additional aim to urge the reader to take some form of action.
Argumentation schemes are stereotypical patterns of inference, combining semantic-ontological relations with types of reasoning and logical axioms and representing the abstract structure of the most common types of natural arguments. [13] A typical example is the argument from expert opinion, shown below, which has two premises and a conclusion ...
There are there most basic types of semantic arguments, which have different argumentation schemes, but all modify meaning to support persuasion: argument from definition, argument to definition (as distinguished by Peter of Spain: definitio-definitum and definitum-definitio), and classification argument.
In linguistics, an argument is an expression that helps complete the meaning of a predicate, [1] the latter referring in this context to a main verb and its auxiliaries. In this regard, the complement is a closely related concept. Most predicates take one, two, or three arguments. A predicate and its arguments form a predicate-argument structure.
Example of an early argument map, from Richard Whately's Elements of Logic (1852 edition). Argumentation theory is the interdisciplinary study of how conclusions can be supported or undermined by premises through logical reasoning.
An argument by example (also known as argument from example) is an argument in which a claim is supported by providing examples. Most conclusions drawn in surveys and carefully controlled experiments are arguments by example and generalization.
[1]: 18 The structures of argumentative speech, which Habermas identifies as the absence of coercive force, the mutual search for understanding, and the compelling power of the better argument, form the key features from which intersubjective rationality can make communication possible. Action undertaken by participants through a process of ...