Thou Shalt Not Squander Life – Comparing Five Approaches to Argument Strength

Zenker, Frank; Dębowska-Kozłowska, Kamila; Godden, David; Selinger, Marcin; Wells, Simon

Abstract

Different approaches analyze the strength of a natural language argument in different ways. This paper contrasts the dialectical, structural, probabilistic (or Bayesian), computational, and empirical approaches by exemplarily applying them to a single argumentative text (Epicureans on Squandering Life; Aikin & Talisse, 2019). Rather than pitching these approaches against one another, our main goal is to show the room for fruitful interaction. Our focus is on a dialectical analysis of the squandering argument as an argumentative response that voids an interlocutor’s right to assertion. This analysis addresses the pragmatic dimensions of arguing and implies an argument structure that is consistent with empirical evidence of perceived argument strength. Results show that the squandering argument can be evaluated as a (non-fallacious) ad hominem argument, which however is not necessarily stronger than possible arguments attacking it.

Citation

Zenker, F., Dębowska-Kozłowska, K., Godden, D., Selinger, M., & Wells, S. (2023). Thou Shalt Not Squander Life – Comparing Five Approaches to Argument Strength. Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric, 68(1), 133-167. https://doi.org/10.2478/slgr-2023-0007

• Journal Article Type: Article
• Acceptance Date: Oct 18, 2023
• Online Publication Date: Dec 31, 2023
• Publication Date: 2023-12
• Deposit Date: Jan 5, 2024
• Publicly Available Date: Jan 8, 2024
• Publisher: De Gruyter
• Peer Reviewed: Peer Reviewed
• Volume: 68
• Issue: 1
• Pages: 133-167
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/slgr-2023-0007
• Keywords: argument structure, Bayesian, computation, diagram, dialectic, empirical, evaluation, perceived argument strength, thought listing
• Public URL: http://researchrepository.napier.ac.uk/Output/3446052