The Argument Scheme-based Approach to Argument Structure
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22329/il.v45i1.8749Keywords:
argument scheme, argument structure, convergent structure, linked structure, relevanceAbstract
Abstract: The concept of argument structure is pivotal in argumentation theory and is extensively employed to analyze and describe arguments. However, as indicated in a previous study (Yu & Zenker, 2022), extant strength-based and relevance-based approaches fall short in distinguishing linked and convergent structures. This paper aims to address this gap by proposing a new argument scheme-based approach and demonstrating its validity. After reviewing the presupposition and inconsistency problems of existing approaches, we analyze their origins in-depth, propose the argument scheme-based approach, demonstrate its validity, and discuss its advantages and challenges. Finally, we argue that our approach, rather than diminishing the concept of argument structure, restores it to its rightful theoretical position.
Résumé: Le concept de structure argumentative est essentiel en théorie de l'argumentation et il est largement utilisé pour analyser et décrire les arguments. Cependant, comme indiqué dans une étude précédente (Yu & Zenker, 2022), les approches existantes basées sur la force et la pertinence ne parviennent pas à distinguer les structures liées et convergentes. Cet article vise à combler cette lacune en proposant une nouvelle approche basée sur les schémas argumentatifs et en démontrant sa validité. Après avoir examiné les problèmes de présupposition et d'incohérence des approches existantes, nous analysons leurs origines en profondeur, proposons l'approche basée sur les schémas argumentatifs, démontrons sa validité et discutons de ses avantages et de ses défis. Enfin, nous soutenons que notre approche, plutôt que de diminuer le concept de structure argumentative, lui redonne sa place théorique légitime.
Publication Facts
Reviewer profiles N/A
Author statements
Indexed in
-
—
- Editor & editorial board
- profiles
- Academic society
- N/A
- Publisher
- University of Windsor
To learn about these publication facts, click 
PF is maintained by the Public Knowledge Project
References
Aikin, S. 2008. Tu quoque arguments and the significance of hypocrisy. Informal Logic 28: 155-169.
Freeman, J. 1988. Thinking Logically. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Freeman, J. 1991. Dialectics and the Macrostructure of Arguments. Berlin: Foris.
Freeman, J. 1992. Relevance, warrants, backing, inductive support. Argumentation 6: 219-235.
Freeman, J. 2011. Argument Structure: Representation and Theory. Dordrecht-New York: Springer.
Goddu, G. 2007. Walton on argument structure. Informal Logic 27: 5-25.
Govier, T. 2010. A Practical Study of Argument (7th ed.). Belmont: Wadsworth.
Peirce, C. S. 1955. What is a leading principle? In Philosophical Writings of Peirce, ed. J. Buchler, pp. 129-134. New York, NY: Dover.
Snoeck Henkemans, A. F. 1992. Analysing Complex Argumentation: The Reconstruction of Multiple and Coordinatively Compound Argumentation in a Critical Discussion. Amsterdam: Sic Sat.
Snoeck Henkemans, A. F. 2000. State-of-the-art: The structure of argumentation. Argumentation 14: 447–473.
Snoeck Henkemans, A. F. 2001. Argumentation structures. In Crucial Concepts in Argumentation Theory, ed. F.H. van Eemeren, pp. 101-134. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.
van Eemeren, F. H., B. Garssen, E.C.W. Krabbe, F. Snoek Henkemans, B. Verheij, & J.H.M. Wagemans. 2014. Handbook of Argumentation Theory. Dordrecht: Springer.
van Eemeren, F. H., & Grootendorst, R. 1992. Argumentation, Communication, and Fallacies: A Pragma-dialectical Perspective. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
van Eemeren, F. H., & Grootendorst, R. 2004. A Systematic Theory of Argumentation. The Pragma-dialectical Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Walton, D. 1996. Argument Structure: A Pragmatic Theory. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Walton, D., C. Reed, & F. Macagno. 2008. Argumentation Schemes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Woods, J. 2007. Lightening up on the ad hominem. Informal Logic 27: 109-134.
Yu, S., & Zenker, F. 2019. A dialectical view on conduction: Reasons, warrants, and normal suasory inclinations. Informal Logic 39: 32-69.
Yu, S., & Zenker, F. 2020. Schemes, critical questions, and complete argument evaluation. Argumentation 34: 469-498.
Yu, S., & Zenker, F. 2022. Identifying linked and convergent argument structures: A problem unsolved. Informal Logic 42: 363-387.
