This paper provides a theoretical rationale for distinguishing four basic argument forms. On the basis of a survey of classical and contemporary definitions of argument, a set of assumptions is formulated regarding the linguistic and pragmatic aspects of arguments. It is demonstrated how these assumptions yield four different argument forms: (1) first-order predicate arguments, (2) first-order subject arguments, (3) second-order subject arguments, and (4) second-order predicate arguments. These argument forms are then further described and illustrated by means of concrete examples, and it is explained how they are visually represented in the Periodic Table of Arguments
The article develops and justifies, on the basis of epistemological argumentation theory, two centra...
The paper develops a classificatory system of basic argument types on the basis of the epistemologic...
The book offers a compact but comprehensive introductory overview of the crucial components of argum...
This paper provides a theoretical rationale for distinguishing four basic argument forms. On the bas...
The existing classifications of arguments are unsatisfying in a number of ways. This paper proposes ...
In the paper I propose conceptions of argument, of uses of argument, and of argumentation that rely ...
The concept of arguments schemes is fundamental for argumentation studies; but its implementation is...
People always talk, discuss, argue, criticize or contradict each other. Have you ever thought of how...
In the last quarter-century, the emergence of argumentation theory has spurred the development of an...
Our typology is based on two ground adequacy factors, one logical and one epistemic. Logically, the ...
The representation and classification of the structure of natural arguments has been one of the most...
We develop conceptions of arguments and of argument types that will, by serving as the basis for dev...
The study of argumentation is often considered to be part of the discipline called logic, more in pa...
This is the Commentary on Wagemans\u27 paper Constructing a Periodic Table of Arguments
This paper focuses on the inferential configuration of arguments, generally referred to as argument ...
The article develops and justifies, on the basis of epistemological argumentation theory, two centra...
The paper develops a classificatory system of basic argument types on the basis of the epistemologic...
The book offers a compact but comprehensive introductory overview of the crucial components of argum...
This paper provides a theoretical rationale for distinguishing four basic argument forms. On the bas...
The existing classifications of arguments are unsatisfying in a number of ways. This paper proposes ...
In the paper I propose conceptions of argument, of uses of argument, and of argumentation that rely ...
The concept of arguments schemes is fundamental for argumentation studies; but its implementation is...
People always talk, discuss, argue, criticize or contradict each other. Have you ever thought of how...
In the last quarter-century, the emergence of argumentation theory has spurred the development of an...
Our typology is based on two ground adequacy factors, one logical and one epistemic. Logically, the ...
The representation and classification of the structure of natural arguments has been one of the most...
We develop conceptions of arguments and of argument types that will, by serving as the basis for dev...
The study of argumentation is often considered to be part of the discipline called logic, more in pa...
This is the Commentary on Wagemans\u27 paper Constructing a Periodic Table of Arguments
This paper focuses on the inferential configuration of arguments, generally referred to as argument ...
The article develops and justifies, on the basis of epistemological argumentation theory, two centra...
The paper develops a classificatory system of basic argument types on the basis of the epistemologic...
The book offers a compact but comprehensive introductory overview of the crucial components of argum...