Informal Logic: A Handbook for Critical Argumentation
By Douglas Walton. 1989
Subfields: Natural Language Processing
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Natural Language Processing
- Timothy Niven
- Hung-Yu kao
- Elizabeth Black
- Anthony Hunter
- Baruch B. Schwarz
- Christa S. C. Asterhan
- Michael Kane
- Samuel R. Bowman
Citations in the corpus
- Probing Neural Network Comprehension of Natural Language Arguments (2019, background): “However it would be hard to find it stated anywhere since warrants are most often left implicit (Walton, 2005).”
- A Relevance-theoretic Framework for Constructing and Deconstructing Enthymemes (2012, background): “those presented by people in general) are normally enthymemes [ Wal89 ].”
- A FRAMEWORK TO SUPPORT RESEARCH ON INFORMAL INFERENTIAL REASONING5 (2008, background): “This may be due to the reliance of informal reasoning on context or subject matter (Perkins, 1985b; Walton, 1989).”
- Argumentation for Learning: Well-Trodden Paths and Unexplored Territories (2016, background): “…Masterpieces such as La Nouvelle Rh etorique (Perelman & Olbrechts-Tyteca, 1958), Informal Logic: A Handbook of Critical Argumentation (Walton, 1989), and Fundamentals of Argumentation Theory (van Eemeren et al., 1996) systematically rely on their venerable predecessors, while basing…”
- Certification Testing as an Illustration of Argument-Based Validation (2004, background): “Over the last 40 to 50 years, a new set of overlapping disciplines has emerged, referred to as “informal logic” (Walton, 1989), “presumptive reasoning” (Blair, 1999; Pinto, 2001; Toulmin, 1958, 2001; Walton, 1996), “argumentation theory” (Walton, 1998), dialectic reasoning (Johnstone, 1978; Pinto,…”
- What Is Meant by Argumentative Competence? An Integrative Review of Methods of Analysis and Assessment in Education (2013, background): “In contrast to at-the-time prevalent formal logic, which was exclusively based on deductive syllogisms, the more recent informal logic current recognizes at least three types of inferences: deductive, inductive, and plausible or abductive arguments (Walton, 1989).”