Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘deliberation’

CMNA 2014

the 14th workshop on Computational Models of Natural Argument

joint with the 1st International Workshop on Methodologies for Research on Legal Argumentation in association with JURIX 2014

10th December 2014 – Krakow – Poland

Introduction

The series of workshops on Computational Models of Natural Argument is continuing to attract high quality submissions from researchers around the world since its inception in 2001. Like the past editions, CMNA 14 acts to nurture and provide succor to the ever growing community working on Argument and Computation, a field developed in recent years overlapping Argumentation Theory and Artificial Intelligence.

AI has witnessed a prodigious growth in uses of argumentation throughout many of its subdisciplines: agent system negotiation protocols that demonstrate higher levels of sophistication and robustness; argumentation-based models of evidential relations and legal processes that are more expressive; groupwork tools that use argument to structure interaction and debate; computer-based learning tools that exploit monological and dialogical argument structures in designing pedagogic environments; decision support systems that build upon argumentation theoretic models of deliberation to better integrate with human reasoning; and models of knowledge engineering structured around core concepts of argument to simplify knowledge elicitation and representation problems. Furthermore, benefits have not been unilateral for AI, as demonstrated by the increasing presence of AI scholars in classical argumentation theory events and journals, and AI implementations of argument finding application in both research and pedagogic practice within philosophy and argumentation theory.

Full information, including deadlines, are available at the conference website: CMNA 2014.

Read Full Post »

Argumentation, Rationality and Decision

Imperial College London, 18th-19th September 2014

Argumentation, initially studied in philosophy and law, has in recent years been the subject of extensive formal research in artificial intelligence and computer science. It provides representations and algorithms for reasoning with incomplete and possibly inconsistent information. Formalisms can be used to model decision-making by individual agents performing critical thinking or by multiple entities dialectically engaged to reach mutually acceptable decisions. However, so far there has been little engagement with the rich mathematical theories of decision, studied as part of microeconomic theory.

In turn, formal rational choice theory has paid little attention to the structure and content of arguments brought to bear on decisions. The outcomes of choices are typically assigned values treated as embodying a cardinal or ordinal preference relation, with decision rules identifying good choices according to various decision rules and under differing conditions of circumstantial knowledge (certainty, strict uncertainty, risk). However, when people make decisions, whether that process has been rational or not depends not only on the optimality of outcome, but also on the argumentative structure implicit in the person’s deliberation. The structure of argument is important, and arguments for and against choices are weighed against each other depending on how firm the reasons are from which the argument is formed.

(more…)

Read Full Post »

EXTENDED CALL

“Reasons and Deliberation in Real-World Contexts”

DATES: JUNE 17TH-18TH 2013

The Instituto de Filosofia da Linguagem (Institute for the Philosophy of Language) at FCSH-Universidade Nova de Lisboa (New University of Lisbon) is proud to announce its second Graduate Student Conference, to be held on the 17thand 18thof June, 2013, as part of the “Argumentation, Communication, and Context” project.

Keynote speakers:

Dr. Hugo Mercier (CNRS Research Scientist, Laboratoire Langage, Cerveau et Cognition, Lyon, France)

Dr. Catherine Moury (Assistant Professor, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Portugal)

Following the title of the conference, we are inviting graduate students from a variety of disciplines to deliver a 30-minute presentation discussing their current research pertaining to reason-giving and deliberation. The aim is to discuss the application of theoretical observations to empirical, or real-world, scenarios and thus highlight the importance of context to the processes of reason-giving and deliberation.

EXTENDED DEADLINE: 15 APRIL 2013

Submission guidelines:Submissions should consist of a 350-500 word abstract and be suitable for BLIND review. Abstracts and author information should be e-mailed as attachments to Michael Baumtrog at iflgraduateconference@gmail.com . Please place the blind abstract in one file and the author(s) contact information in a separate file (.doc(x) or .pdf).

Read Full Post »

2nd IFL Graduate Student Conference: “Reasons and Deliberation in Real-World Contexts”

DATES: JUNE 17TH-18TH 2013

The Instituto de Filosofia da Linguagem (Institute for the Philosophy of Language) at FCSH-Universidade Nova de Lisboa (New University of Lisbon) is proud to announce its second Graduate Student Conference, to be held on the 17th and 18th of June, 2013, as part of the “Argumentation, Communication, and Context” project.

Keynote speakers:

Dr. Hugo Mercier (CNRS Research Scientist, Laboratoire Langage, Cerveau et Cognition, Lyon, France)

and

Dr. Catherine Moury (Assistant Professor, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Portugal)

 

Following the title of the conference, we are inviting graduate students from a variety of disciplines to deliver a 30-minute presentation discussing their current research pertaining to reason-giving and deliberation. The aim is to discuss the application of theoretical observations to empirical, or real-world, scenarios and thus highlight the importance of context to the processes of reason-giving and deliberation. (more…)

Read Full Post »

Rhetoricians will appreciate the presence of an attentive, if quadrupedal, audience in addition to the speakers.

An interesting phone interview with Hugo Mercier popped up today on Point of Inquiry, the blog for the Center for Inquiry.  The role of the confirmation bias, disagreement, and polarization are covered in this interesting discussion.  There are some very familiar themes here for argumentation theorists. It’s well worth a listen.  The clear and economical discussion of what can be complicated ideas here makes the podcast something potentially useful in advanced classes on reasoning too. The interview is about 40 minutes long. Click on the link below to listen.

Interview with Hugo Mercier

(Note: The file may take a moment to load depending upon your connection speed, so do be patient!)

 

Read Full Post »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 96 other followers