The three bases for the enthymeme: A dialogical theory

34Citations
Citations of this article
49Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

In traditional logic, an enthymeme is said to be an argument, or chain of argumentation, with one or more missing (implicit) premises or conclusions. In this paper a new theory of enthymemes, based on recent developments in argumentation technology including argumentation schemes, argument visualization tools and formal dialogue systems, is put forward. The dialogical theory hypothesizes three bases for the enthymeme in a formal dialogue system CBVK: (1) the participants' commitment sets, (2) sets of argumentation schemes (especially including presumptive schemes) shared by both participants, and (3) a set of propositions representing common knowledge shared by both participants. The formal dialogue system CBVK is the backbone of the theory of enthymemes into which these three components are built. Three examples of enthymemes of a kind commonly found in everyday conversational argumentation are used to show how the theory applies. © 2007 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Walton, D. (2008). The three bases for the enthymeme: A dialogical theory. Journal of Applied Logic, 6(3), 361–379. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jal.2007.06.002

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free