2004
Volume 35, Issue 2
  • ISSN: 1573-9775
  • E-ISSN: 2352-1236

Abstract

In order to convince people of a claim persuasive arguments are important. Social psychological studies have shown that some arguments are more persuasive than others, but it is not clear what argument characteristics account for this difference. In search of a theory of argument quality this paper reviews different perspectives on argument quality. Cognitive psychological studies have uncovered such argument characteristics, but this perspective has important drawbacks. The most fruitful account is argument theory with its argumentation schemes and critical questions. This account, too, has shortcomings. This paper argues that a Bayesian perspective is a useful starting point to develop a theory of argument quality. A Bayesian analysis of the ad populum argument shows the potential of this account. An interdisciplinary approach with insights from psychology, the argumentation schemes, and Bayes is potentially fruitful to build a theory of argument quality.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.5117/TVT2013.2.HORN
2013-10-01
2021-10-18
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.5117/TVT2013.2.HORN
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): ad populum; argument quality; argumentation schemes; Bayes
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error