scholarly journals Multimodal practical argumentation and behavioral change: an analysis of the “Remember, the Metro is for everyone” campaign

2021 ◽  
pp. 779-807
Author(s):  
Paulo Roberto Gonçalves-Segundo ◽  
Gabriel Isola-Lanzoni
Keyword(s):  
Behavioral Change ◽  
Practical Reasoning ◽  
Argumentation Theory ◽  
Social Semiotics ◽  
Argumentation Schemes ◽  
Direct Role ◽  
Combined Process ◽  
Practical Argumentation

The aim of this paper is to discuss how the verbal and the pictorial modalities interact to construe argumentative meanings in a transport campaign promoted by Lisbon’s subway company in 2018. As an instance of multimodal practical argumentation aimed at behavioral change, the campaign constitutes a significant corpus for discussing a series of relevant issues in the field, such as the illative reconstruction of arguments, the affordances of each modality in schematization, and the operationalization of pictorial analysis in regard to its argumentative potential. By drawing on a dialogue between Social Semiotics and Argumentation Theory, we arrived at the following conclusions: (i) the campaign established verbal and pictorial subcanvases specialized in construing certain parts of the main practical argumentation schemes; (ii) images were inherently tied to the construction of Circumstantial premises, thus exerting a direct role in argumentation, and tended to portray complex representational meanings, with three combined process types; (iii) the most productive argumentation schemes utilized were the instrumental practical reasoning scheme, the argument from values and the argument from consequences; (iv) there were two targeted audiences – the readers/clients in general, usually identified with the affected depicted people, and the clients whose behavior was being targeted in the campaign, represented as transgressors in the pictorial subcanvas

scholarly journals Is Practical Reasoning Presumptive?

2008 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 91 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christian Kock
Keyword(s):  
Practical Reasoning ◽  
Burden Of Proof ◽  
Argumentation Theory ◽  
Standard Case ◽  
Subjective Element

Douglas Walton has done extensive and valuable work on the concepts of presumption and practical reasoning. However, Walton’s attempt to model practical reasoning as presumptive is misguided. The notions of “inference” and of the burden of proof shifting back and forth between proponent and respondent are misleading and lead to counterintuitive consequences. Because the issue in practical reasoning is a proposal, not a proposition, there are, in the standard case, several perfectly good reasons on both sides simultaneously, which implies that argument appraisal necessarily contains a subjective element—a fact argumentation theory needs to conceptualize.

scholarly journals Norms of Legitimate Dissensus

2008 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 179 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christian Kock
Keyword(s):  
Political Philosophy ◽  
Argumentation Theory ◽  
Distinctive Features ◽  
Public Debates ◽  
Practical Argumentation

The paper calls for argumentation theory to learn from moral and political philosophy. Several thinkers in these fields help understand the occurrence of what we may call legitimate dissensus: enduring disagreement even between reasonable people arguing reasonably. It inevitably occurs over practical issues, e.g., issues of action rather than truth, because there will normally be legitimate arguments on both sides, and these will be incommensurable, i.e., they cannot be objectively weighed against each other. Accordingly, ‘inference,’ ‘validity,’ and ‘sufficiency’ are inapplicable notions. Further distinctive features of pro and con arguments in practical argumentation are explored, and some corollaries are drawn regarding evaluative norms of legitimate dissensus. Examples from immigrationrelated public debates in Denmark are given.

Using Argumentation Schemes for Argument Extraction

2012 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 33-61 ◽  
Author(s):  
Douglas Walton
Keyword(s):  
Expert Opinion ◽  
Classification System ◽  
Practical Reasoning ◽  
State Of The Art ◽  
Fear Appeal ◽  
Negative Consequences ◽  
Argumentation Schemes ◽  
Extraction Techniques ◽  
Computational Implementation ◽  
Argument From Expert Opinion

This paper surveys the state-of-the-art of argumentation schemes used as argument extraction techniques in cognitive informatics and uses examples to show how a series of connected problems needs to be solved to move these techniques forward to computational implementation. Some of the schemes considered are argument from expert opinion, practical reasoning, argument from negative consequences, fear appeal arguments, argument from commitment, argument from inconsistent commitments, and the circumstantial ad hominem argument. The paper shows how schemes need to be formed into clusters of sub-schemes work toward a classification system of schemes from the bottom up, and how identification conditions for each scheme can be helpful for argument extraction.

scholarly journals Peggio il rimedio del male? Argomenti e valori nelle controversie sulla vaccinazione contro il Covid-19

2021 ◽  
Vol 69 (5 Zeszyt specjalny) ◽  
pp. 175-189
Author(s):  
Maria Załęska
Keyword(s):  
Interdisciplinary Approach ◽  
Shared Values ◽  
Argumentation Theory ◽  
Argumentation Schemes ◽  
The Real ◽  
Common Experience ◽  
The Third ◽  
Internet Users ◽  
Real Risk ◽  
The Subject

An interdisciplinary approach involving linguistics, rhetoric, and argumentation theory helps reveal how people argue their opinions and decisions. Although the pandemic is a common experience, its risks are perceived in different ways. For some, the real threat is Covid-19 and the remedy is vaccination. For others, however, the real risk is the vaccine and the “remedy” is refusal to get vaccinated. Justifying their opinions on the subject, Italian Internet users refer to common values (such as life, health, responsibility, etc.). However, since Internet users diagnose risks in different ways, they make use of shared values in differing ways. In this paper, the views of those for and against vaccination are analyzed from three complementary perspectives. The first one concerns the differences in which people conceive of various values. The second one shows how, using the same topoi, pro- and anti-vaccine advocates create different hierarchies of values that are fundamental to their respective decisions. Finally, the third one explores differences in the ways values are used in various argumentation schemes used in disputes on vaccination.

scholarly journals Intelligent Practical Reasoning for Autonomous Agents: An Introduction

2016 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Douglas Walton
Keyword(s):  
Artificial Intelligence ◽  
Recent Work ◽  
Autonomous Agents ◽  
Practical Reasoning ◽  
Public Deliberation ◽  
Fault System ◽  
Argumentation Schemes ◽  
Argument Mapping

<p>This paper is an introduction to recent work on practical (means-end, goal-directed) reasoning in artificial intelligence. By using an example of community deliberation concerning whether to change to a no-fault system of insurance, it is explained how practical reasoning is used in public deliberation. It is shown how argument mapping and argumentation schemes are useful tools for modeling the structure of the argumentation in such cases. The distinction between instrumental practical reasoning and value-based practical reasoning is modeled using argumentation schemes.</p>

Practical reasoning in corporate communication with multiple audiences

2017 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 167-192 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rudi Palmieri ◽  
Sabrina Mazzali-Lurati
Keyword(s):  
Practical Reasoning ◽  
Strategic Communication ◽  
Analytical Framework ◽  
Corporate Communication ◽  
Illustrative Case ◽  
Integrated Framework ◽  
Argument Schemes ◽  
Multiple Audiences ◽  
Practical Argumentation ◽  
Selection Of

Abstract Corporate strategic communication has to be designed by considering multiple audiences of stakeholders. In this paper, we study the connection between the audience structure of corporate messages and the structure of the practical argumentation advanced to persuasively justify a business proposal. To this purpose, we combine a conceptual and analytical framework for the reconstruction of multiple audiences – the Text Stakeholders model (Palmieri & Mazzali 2016), with a conceptual and analytical framework for the reconstruction of argument schemes – the Argumentum Model of Topics (Rigotti & Greco Morasso 2010). A takeover proposal made by Ryanair for Aer Lingus is examined as an illustrative case in which this integrated framework is applied. We focus our analysis on Ryanair’s offer document to show how the particular structure of the audience is reflected in the selection of specific value and goal premises (endoxa) and in the activation of specific inferential relations (maxims) of practical reasoning.

E3 ubiquitin ligases

2005 ◽  
Vol 41 ◽  
pp. 15-30 ◽  
Author(s):  
Helen C. Ardley ◽  
Philip A. Robinson
Keyword(s):  
Protein Complexes ◽  
Loss Of Function ◽  
Direct Role ◽  
Cellular Processes ◽  
Substrate Protein ◽  
Protein Ubiquitination ◽  
C Terminus ◽  
Full Complement ◽  
Spatio Temporal ◽  
Eukaryotic Organisms

The selectivity of the ubiquitin–26 S proteasome system (UPS) for a particular substrate protein relies on the interaction between a ubiquitin-conjugating enzyme (E2, of which a cell contains relatively few) and a ubiquitin–protein ligase (E3, of which there are possibly hundreds). Post-translational modifications of the protein substrate, such as phosphorylation or hydroxylation, are often required prior to its selection. In this way, the precise spatio-temporal targeting and degradation of a given substrate can be achieved. The E3s are a large, diverse group of proteins, characterized by one of several defining motifs. These include a HECT (homologous to E6-associated protein C-terminus), RING (really interesting new gene) or U-box (a modified RING motif without the full complement of Zn2+-binding ligands) domain. Whereas HECT E3s have a direct role in catalysis during ubiquitination, RING and U-box E3s facilitate protein ubiquitination. These latter two E3 types act as adaptor-like molecules. They bring an E2 and a substrate into sufficiently close proximity to promote the substrate's ubiquitination. Although many RING-type E3s, such as MDM2 (murine double minute clone 2 oncoprotein) and c-Cbl, can apparently act alone, others are found as components of much larger multi-protein complexes, such as the anaphase-promoting complex. Taken together, these multifaceted properties and interactions enable E3s to provide a powerful, and specific, mechanism for protein clearance within all cells of eukaryotic organisms. The importance of E3s is highlighted by the number of normal cellular processes they regulate, and the number of diseases associated with their loss of function or inappropriate targeting.

Argumentation Schemes

2008 ◽  
Author(s):  
Douglas Walton ◽  
Christopher Reed ◽  
Fabrizio Macagno
Keyword(s):  
Argumentation Schemes
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document