Location
Room 3
Document Type
Paper
Keywords
Argument strength, Bayesian argumentation, deliberation, dialectical argumentation, dialogue, public policy, social epistemology
Start Date
3-6-2020 10:00 AM
End Date
3-6-2020 11:11 AM
Abstract
For the context of practical reasoning, this paper suggests a method of assessing the level of confidence we should rationally have in arguments. It draws from dialectic which induces the elaboration of reasons for a position and on auditors’ prior knowledge. Accurate assessment depends on evidential standards, on selecting dialogue moves according to their practical and epistemic importance, and on selecting auditors according to their competence and diversity of relevant knowledge.
Reader's Reactions
Marcin Lewinski, Commentary on Waleed Mebane’s “Confidence in Arguments in Dialogues for Practical Reasoning” (June 2020)
Included in
Confidence in Arguments in Dialogues for Practical Reasoning
Room 3
For the context of practical reasoning, this paper suggests a method of assessing the level of confidence we should rationally have in arguments. It draws from dialectic which induces the elaboration of reasons for a position and on auditors’ prior knowledge. Accurate assessment depends on evidential standards, on selecting dialogue moves according to their practical and epistemic importance, and on selecting auditors according to their competence and diversity of relevant knowledge.
