Location
University of Windsor
Document Type
Paper
Start Date
3-6-2009 9:00 AM
End Date
6-6-2009 5:00 PM
Abstract
Is it possible to distinguish communities of arguers by tracking the argumentation schemes they employ? There are many ways of relating schemes to communities, but not all are productive. Attention must be paid not only to the admissibility of schemes within a community of argumentational practice, but also to their comparative frequency. Two examples are discussed: informal mathematics, a convenient source of well-documented argumentational practice, and anthropological evidence of non-standard reasoning.
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Response to Submission
David M. Godden, Commentary on Aberdein
Reader's Reactions
David M. Godden, Commentary on Aberdein (June 2009)
Included in
Argumentation Schemes and Communities of Argumentational Practice
University of Windsor
Is it possible to distinguish communities of arguers by tracking the argumentation schemes they employ? There are many ways of relating schemes to communities, but not all are productive. Attention must be paid not only to the admissibility of schemes within a community of argumentational practice, but also to their comparative frequency. Two examples are discussed: informal mathematics, a convenient source of well-documented argumentational practice, and anthropological evidence of non-standard reasoning.
