Defeasible Reasoning and Informal Fallacies

This paper argues that some traditional fallacies should be considered as reasonable arguments when used as part of a properly conducted dialog. It is shown that argumentation schemes, formal dialog models, and profiles of dialog are useful tools for studying properties of defeasible reasoning and fallacies. It is explained how defeasible reasoning of the most common sort can deteriorate into fallacious argumentation in some instances. Conditions are formulated that can be used as normative tools to judge whether a given defeasible argument is fallacious or not. It is shown that three leading violations of proper dialog standards for defeasible reasoning necessary to see how fallacies work are: (a) improper failure to retract a commitment, (b) failure of openness to defeat, and (c) illicit reversal of burden of proof.

[1]  J. Wigmore,et al.  A Treatise on the Anglo-American System of Evidence in Trials at Common Law , 1924 .

[2]  H. Hart.  XI.—The Ascription of Responsibility and Rights , 1949 .

[3]  J. Kemp,et al.  The Concept of Law , 1962 .

[4]  F. J. join,et al.  Burdens of Proof , 1961 .

[5]  R. W. Fleming,et al.  The Obligation to Bargain in Good Faith , 1961 .

[6]  Keith L. Clark,et al.  Negation as Failure , 1987, Logic and Data Bases.

[7]  Jack Minker,et al.  Logic and Data Bases , 1978, Springer US.

[8]  Raymond Reiter,et al.  A Logic for Default Reasoning , 1987, Artif. Intell..

[9]  J. Mackenzie.  The dialectics of logic , 1981 .

[10]  John McCarthy,et al.  Applications of Circumscription to Formalizing Common Sense Knowledge , 1987, NMR.

[11]  Marek J. Sergot,et al.  The British Nationality Act as a logic program , 1986, CACM.

[12]  Kevin D. Ashley,et al.  A case-based system for trade secrets law , 1987, ICAIL '87.

[13]  R. Reiter,et al.  Nonmonotonic reasoning , 1988 .

[14]  Jim D. Mackenzie,et al.  Four dialogue systems , 1990, Stud Logica.

[15]  Trevor J. M. Bench-Capon,et al.  Argument-based explanation of logic programs , 1991, Knowl. Based Syst..

[16]  F. H. Eemeren,et al.  Argumentation, Communication, and Fallacies: A Pragma-dialectical Perspective , 1992 .

[17]  Thomas F. Gordon,et al.  Pleadings game - an artificial intelligence model of procedural justice , 1995 .

[18]  D. Walton.  A Pragmatic Theory of Fallacy , 1995 .

[19]  Ronald Prescott Loui,et al.  Hart's critics on defeasible concepts and ascriptivism , 1995, ICAIL '95.

[20]  Phan Minh Dung,et al.  On the Acceptability of Arguments and its Fundamental Role in Nonmonotonic Reasoning, Logic Programming and n-Person Games , 1995, Artif. Intell..

[21]  D. Walton.  Arguments From Ignorance , 1995 .

[22]  H. Hansen,et al.  Fallacies: Classical and Contemporary Readings , 1995 .

[23]  Appeal to Ignorance , 1995 .

[24]  D. Walton,et al.  Commitment In Dialogue , 1995 .

[25]  Phan Minh Dung,et al.  An Abstract, Argumentation-Theoretic Approach to Default Reasoning , 1997, Artif. Intell..

[26]  C. Tindale.  Fallacies, Blunders, and Dialogue Shifts: Walton‘s Contributions to the Fallacy Debate , 1997 .

[27]  D. Walton.  Rethinking the Fallacy of Hasty Generalization , 1999 .

[28]  M. de Rijke,et al.  JFAK. Essays Dedicated to Johan van Benthem on the occasion of his 50th Birthday , 1999 .

[29]  Erik C. W. Krabbe,et al.  Profiles of Dialogue , 1999 .

[30]  D. Walton.  Profiles of Dialogue for Evaluating Arguments from Ignorance , 1999 .

[31]  Henry Prakken,et al.  On Dialogue Systems with Speech Acts, Arguments, and Counterarguments , 2000, JELIA.

[32]  Henry Prakken,et al.  Credulous and Sceptical Argument Games for Preferred Semantics , 2000, JELIA.

[33]  Peter McBurney,et al.  Games That Agents Play: A Formal Framework for Dialogues between Autonomous Agents , 2002, J. Log. Lang. Inf..

[34]  C. Williams.  Burdens and standards in civil litigation , 2003 .

[35]  Bart Verheij,et al.  Dialectical Argumentation with Argumentation Schemes: An Approach to Legal Logic , 2003, Artificial Intelligence and Law.

[36]  Erik C. W. Krabbe,et al.  The Problem Of Retraction In Critical Discussion , 2001, Synthese.

[37]  Gaetano Aurelio Lanzarone,et al.  Explanation-based interpretation of open-textured concepts in logical models of legislation , 1995, Artificial Intelligence and Law.

[38]  Henry Prakken,et al.  A dialectical model of assessing conflicting arguments in legal reasoning , 1996, Artificial Intelligence and Law.

[39]  Lloyd L. Weinreb.  Legal Reason: The Use of Analogy in Legal Argument , 2005 .

[40]  Lloyd L. Weinreb.  Legal Reason: Index , 2005 .

[41]  D. Walton.  Poisoning the Well , 2006 .

[42]  F. H. Eemeren,et al.  Strategic Maneuvering: A Synthetic Recapitulation , 2006 .

[43]  Henry Prakken,et al.  DOI: 10.1017/S000000000000000 Printed in the United Kingdom Formal systems for persuasion dialogue , 2022 .

[44]  D. Walton.  Metadialogues for Resolving Burden of Proof Disputes , 2007 .

[45]  Trevor J. M. Bench-Capon,et al.  Argumentation in artificial intelligence , 2007, Artif. Intell..

[46]  Henry Prakken,et al.  The Carneades model of argument and burden of proof , 2007, Artif. Intell..

[47]  Trevor J. M. Bench-Capon,et al.  Arguments, Values and Baseballs: Representation of Popov v. Hayashi , 2007, JURIX.

[48]  C. L. Hamblin.  Mathematical models of dialogue1 , 2008 .

[49]  E. Krabbe.  Christopher W. Tindale, Fallacies and Argument Appraisal , 2008 .

[50]  G. Sartor,et al.  A logical analysis of burdens of proof , 2009 .

[51]  Bart Verheij,et al.  Legal Evidence and Proof , 2009 .

[52]  Douglas Walton,et al.  Proof Burdens and Standards , 2009, Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence.