Feeds:
Posts
Comments

“Thinking isn’t agreeing or disagreeing.  That’s voting.” — Robert Frost

In this article from the blog of the Walrus magazine, writer David Rusak nicely sums up the case that social media is increasingly taking over the way in which we communicate.

He writes:

Even in the unstructured, verbal medium of the comments field, with no built-in retweet button and no formal system logging the repetitions, we see a number of people avoiding using their own words in order to instead “cast a vote” for someone else’s. They deliberately represent themselves as part of a countable mass (in this case, of devoted fans), rather than as an individuated person with a novel point of view. I have no idea how widespread this particular trend is, but I think it exemplifies an ongoing shift in the way online communication is done…What’s more, Facebook’s Like button has now allowed us to do away with much commenting, allowing one-click responses that require the least engagement possible.

Continue Reading »

New Book Announcement

Via Mark Battersby at Capilano University:

I would like to bring to your attention a recently published book on critical thinking about scientific information.  Is that a Fact? teaches students how to think critically about scientific and statistical information. The goal of the text is not only to teach students how to identify misleading use of statistics, but also to give students the understanding necessary to evaluate and use statistical information (e.g. polls) and statistically based science (e.g. epidemiology).  The text is written in an entertaining and informative way focusing on the statistical and scientific information that typically informs personal and public decision making.

Intended as a modern replacement for the venerable “How to Lie with Statistics,” Is that a Fact?” is more up-to-date, more comprehensive and the concepts are more clearly stated making it a much more teachable text.  The text is also written with a different attitude.  While “How to Lie..” was focused on “how to defend yourself against statistical disinformation” this text is focused on “how to make intelligent and critical use of statistical evidence.”

For more information or an exam copy click on the link below

http://www.broadviewpress.com/product.php?productid=969

 

Now, here’s the thing.  I like Michael Sandel. I really do. (I even met him once, though I really, really doubt he would remember.) He’s done a lot to advance the cause of political communitarianism–a position that I respect immensely though I do not share it–and I generally regard him as a decent political philosopher.

Perhaps that’s why I have such a hard time sharing his optimism that the world’s democratic processes can be positively reformed if we simply replicate the Socratic teaching model he uses with a roomful of highly intelligent professionals in this TED session (or his classes at Harvard) with audiences throughout the world. It’s an idea that doesn’t live up to the rest of Sandel’s body of work.

That said, it’s not as though he doesn’t have a point. In a sense he’s right. We (in the US) generally have lost the art of public debate.  In my view that’s got a lot to do with our media culture, the state of our educational institutions, our particular political landscape at this point in history, and a host of other factors. I’m just not sure that the cure for what ails us is a re-instating of Aristotelian etiological vocabulary. Don’t get me wrong–I love Aristotle’s ideas too; rather more than Sandel’s in fact– but there’s something a bit too easy about Sandel’s approach to political deliberation here. The missing elements of this talk (and here I find myself thinking back to Jim Freeman’s ISSA keynote from last summer) only remind me, yet again, of how much “mainstream” moral and political philosophy could gain through an acquaintance with argumentation theory.

But maybe that’s just me. Perhaps I’m missing something in this talk, or I simply need a hug today or something.

Note: Although the access to published papers is temporary, the journal itself may be one one interest to researchers in argumentation theory.  Have a look at the upcoming issues at the end of the post. –SP

Subject: is logic universal? open access to logica universalis

Open access to all papers published in Logica Universalis is avalaible up
to December 31st:
http://www.springer.com/birkhauser/mathematics/journal/11787

The latest issue of the journal is on the topic “is logic universal?”
The authors have tried to answer the following questions:

1. Do all human beings have the same capacity of reasoning? Do men,
women, children, Papuans, yuppies, reason in the same way?
2. Does reasoning evolve? Did human beings reason in the same way two
centuries ago? In the future will human beings reason in the same way?
Are computers changing our way of reasoning? Is a mathematical proof
independent of time and culture?
3. Do we reason in different ways depending on the situation? Do we use
the same logic for everyday life, in physics, and in questions to do with
the economy?
4. Do the different systems of logic reflect the diversity of reasoning?
5. Is there any absolute true way of reasoning?
Continue Reading »

CALL FOR PAPERS

Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric

http://logika.uwb.edu.pl/studies/

Special Issue on Argumentation Theory and Computer Science

This journal issue intends to present the current state of the art in the study on the overlap between Argumentation Theory and Computer Science.The issue welcomes original high-quality contributions that have been neither published in nor submitted to any journals or refereed conferences. Among the topics to be addressed there are:

computational models of defeasible arguments

the application of software tools in argument analysis and representation

argument scheme analysis and critique in artificial intelligence

the application of theories of argument in multi-agent systems

the use of software tools in the study of persuasion dialog

the application of software tools in online debates

SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS

 

The length of papers should be between 10 and 20 pages. Authors should submit papers by e-mail in Microsoft Word or TeX file format with tables and figures in the same file. Page format of papers should be A4, text font – Times New Roman, size 12. Line spacing of the text should be single. Additionally figures should be submitted in separate graphics files (bitmap graphics resolution should be 1200 dpi for black and white line drawings and 300 dpi for color and half-tone artwork (all colors will be converted to half-tones). It should be submitted as .tiff, .bmp or .jpg files. Vector graphics should be saved as .emf or .cdr files).

IMPORTANT DATES

Paper submission:

February 15, 2011

Notification of acceptance:

March 15, 2011

 

Articles should be sent by e-mail to the special issue guest editor:

 

Marcin Koszowy

Department of Logic, Informatics and Philosophy of Science

University of Białystok

Sosnowa 64

15-887 Białystok, Poland

koszowy@uwb.edu.pl

CFP: 17th Alta Conference

Call for Papers, Panels, and Abstracts
17th Biennial NCA/AFA Conference on Argumentation, 2011, The Cliff Lodge at Snowbird, Alta, UT, July 28-31.

Theme: Reasoned Argument and Social Change

Submissions for the Program: Please send electronic versions of completed papers, panel proposals, or extended abstracts to the Conference Program Planner, Robert C. Rowland (Alta2011@ku.edu) by Friday, March 4, 2011.

Deadline for Submissions: Friday, March 4, 2011

Submission Format: The Alta Conference invites papers, panel proposals, and paper proposals from any of the traditional perspectives on argumentation or from emerging contemporary views in the social sciences and humanities. Papers may reflect pedagogical, philosophical, theoretical, interpretive, empirical, critical, or cross disciplinary perspectives.

Continue Reading »

The Research Institute for Philosophy Hannover is sponsoring a prize competition on the following question:

“Can pictures be arguments?”

Details (in German): http://www.netzwerk-medienethik.de/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/Flyer-Wiss_Preisfrage-2011.pdf
Those interested in competing should submit a previously unpublished philosophical essay of up to 50 pages (at 2400 characters per page) in English or German by March 15th, 2011.
Awards will be given of 3.000, 2.000 and 1.000 Euro.

Contact Information:
Forschungsinstitut für Philosophie Hannover
Frau Anna Maria Hauk M.A.
Gerberstraße 26
30169 Hannover
Tel.: (05 11) 1 64 09-10
Fax: (05 11) 1 64 09-40
e-mail: hauk@fiph.de
http://www.fiph.de

C.L. Hamblin and Argumentation Theory
A special issue of Informal Logic

Guest editors: Douglas N. Walton and Ralph H. Johnson

Possible topics include, but are not restricted to:
•    Hamblin’s views on logic
•    Hamblin’s views on fallacies
•    Hamblin’s view on argument
•    Hamblin’s views on formal dialectic

Papers should be prepared for blind refereeing and include 100-word-limit Abstract and 10-word-limit Keyword list, and should meet the format requirements of the journal:
http://ojs.uwindsor.ca/ojs/leddy/index.php/informal_logic/about Click on “Submissions>Author Guidelines” to read the format requirements.

Submission deadline: 30 June 2011.

Papers will be blind refereed. Questions may be directed to either of the Guest Editors. The paper should be submitted to either one of the Guest Editors. Please advise one of the guest editors if you intend to submit a paper.

Douglas N. Walton: walton@uwindsor.ca Ralph H. Johnson: johnsoa@uwindsor.ca

CRRAR Summer Institute 2011

The Centre for Research on Reasoning, Argumentation and Rhetoric announces a Summer Institute on “Reasoning and Argument: Computing and Cognitive Science Perspectives,” to be held at the University of Windsor, May 9-27, 2011.  Attendees can enroll in a 500-level graduate course at the University of Windsor entitled “Current Issues in Argumentation Studies” for either Arts (Humanities) or Social Science credit. See the attachment for details about the Summer Institute.

CRRAR Summer Institute Announcement

Dear colleagues

We would like to let you know about our new book which has just been published: Reason in the Balance: An Inquiry Approach to Critical Thinking. The approach taken to critical thinking instruction is dialectical, focusing on the kind of comparative evaluation of contending positions and arguments which we make in actual contexts of disagreement and debate.
For more information, please contact the publisher, McGraw-Hill Ryerson at:
or
Cheers,
Sharon Bailin & Mark Battersby
Note: below is a downloadable flyer with more information. –SP