找回密碼
 To register

QQ登錄

只需一步,快速開始

掃一掃,訪問微社區(qū)

打印 上一主題 下一主題

Titlebook: ;

[復(fù)制鏈接]
查看: 25298|回復(fù): 50
樓主
發(fā)表于 2025-3-21 17:13:31 | 只看該作者 |倒序?yàn)g覽 |閱讀模式
書目名稱Groundwork in the Theory of Argumentation
編輯J. Anthony Blair,Christopher W. Tindale
視頻videohttp://file.papertrans.cn/389/388883/388883.mp4
叢書名稱Argumentation Library
圖書封面Titlebook: ;
出版日期Book 2012
版次1
doihttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2363-4
isbn_softcover978-94-007-3824-9
isbn_ebook978-94-007-2363-4Series ISSN 1566-7650 Series E-ISSN 2215-1907
issn_series 1566-7650
The information of publication is updating

書目名稱Groundwork in the Theory of Argumentation影響因子(影響力)




書目名稱Groundwork in the Theory of Argumentation影響因子(影響力)學(xué)科排名




書目名稱Groundwork in the Theory of Argumentation網(wǎng)絡(luò)公開度




書目名稱Groundwork in the Theory of Argumentation網(wǎng)絡(luò)公開度學(xué)科排名




書目名稱Groundwork in the Theory of Argumentation被引頻次




書目名稱Groundwork in the Theory of Argumentation被引頻次學(xué)科排名




書目名稱Groundwork in the Theory of Argumentation年度引用




書目名稱Groundwork in the Theory of Argumentation年度引用學(xué)科排名




書目名稱Groundwork in the Theory of Argumentation讀者反饋




書目名稱Groundwork in the Theory of Argumentation讀者反饋學(xué)科排名




單選投票, 共有 1 人參與投票
 

1票 100.00%

Perfect with Aesthetics

 

0票 0.00%

Better Implies Difficulty

 

0票 0.00%

Good and Satisfactory

 

0票 0.00%

Adverse Performance

 

0票 0.00%

Disdainful Garbage

您所在的用戶組沒有投票權(quán)限
沙發(fā)
發(fā)表于 2025-3-21 23:02:16 | 只看該作者
板凳
發(fā)表于 2025-3-22 03:00:16 | 只看該作者
Premise Adequacyment, there will then be many different kinds of “good argument.” The classic philosophical notion that truth is a sufficient condition of premise adequacy for all argumentation does not stand up to the test of these different contexts of evaluation.
地板
發(fā)表于 2025-3-22 05:18:40 | 只看該作者
Walton’s Argumentation Schemes for Presumptive Reasoning: A Critique and Development abstraction” problems needs to be addressed. Last, I propose ways of filling in some of the missing pieces. Although I think Walton’s 1966 account is incomplete, and I disagree with some details, I believe it is important, and on the right track.
5#
發(fā)表于 2025-3-22 12:41:57 | 只看該作者
Mark J. Bliton,Stuart G. Finderering evidence supporting his interpretations, but without seeking out and considering evidence against them, except to discredit it. It is argued that students need to learn how to think critically about history in the specific ways needed to recognize, understand and avoid the flaws of Keegstra’s approach.
6#
發(fā)表于 2025-3-22 13:25:27 | 只看該作者
,Diskussion verschiedener Erfolgsma?st?be, or the trustworthiness of one’s own experience can be and have been formulated. Thorough arguments will have a dialectical dimension as well, with objections to the thesis or to the arguments for it acknowledged and answers to them provided.
7#
發(fā)表于 2025-3-22 17:36:21 | 只看該作者
8#
發(fā)表于 2025-3-22 22:26:40 | 只看該作者
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-01072-0ses of arguments, or else (or as well), a confusion of modes or models of arguments with perspectives on argument. The conception of argument proposed is in an important respect pluralistic, and is hostile to the attempt to reduce the variety of models or uses of arguments to any single one.
9#
發(fā)表于 2025-3-23 04:29:36 | 只看該作者
Bharata’s Performative Teleosis a complete account of their logical norms. I sketch one way of framing their norms within the Toulmin model that assimilates a lot of the recent work of various theorists. And I join those who insist that assessing the logic of an argument is not all there is to evaluating arguments.
10#
發(fā)表于 2025-3-23 06:47:57 | 只看該作者
The Keegstra Affair: A Test Case for Critical Thinkingering evidence supporting his interpretations, but without seeking out and considering evidence against them, except to discredit it. It is argued that students need to learn how to think critically about history in the specific ways needed to recognize, understand and avoid the flaws of Keegstra’s approach.
 關(guān)于派博傳思  派博傳思旗下網(wǎng)站  友情鏈接
派博傳思介紹 公司地理位置 論文服務(wù)流程 影響因子官網(wǎng) 吾愛論文網(wǎng) 大講堂 北京大學(xué) Oxford Uni. Harvard Uni.
發(fā)展歷史沿革 期刊點(diǎn)評(píng) 投稿經(jīng)驗(yàn)總結(jié) SCIENCEGARD IMPACTFACTOR 派博系數(shù) 清華大學(xué) Yale Uni. Stanford Uni.
QQ|Archiver|手機(jī)版|小黑屋| 派博傳思國(guó)際 ( 京公網(wǎng)安備110108008328) GMT+8, 2025-10-5 07:39
Copyright © 2001-2015 派博傳思   京公網(wǎng)安備110108008328 版權(quán)所有 All rights reserved
快速回復(fù) 返回頂部 返回列表
怀来县| 溧阳市| 理塘县| 抚远县| 淅川县| 库伦旗| 玛多县| 萝北县| 新疆| 彰武县| 台中市| 习水县| 固镇县| 襄城县| 伽师县| 东至县| 邮箱| 商南县| 吉木乃县| 如皋市| 武隆县| 三门峡市| 贡觉县| 鹤峰县| 仙游县| 壶关县| 津南区| 旬阳县| 仁寿县| 枝江市| 南木林县| 新郑市| 奈曼旗| 丹阳市| 泰来县| 桐乡市| 辽中县| 红原县| 始兴县| 独山县| 疏附县|