Forms and Norms of Indecision in Argumentation Theory

Cite This

Files in this item

Checksum: MD5:7f8f4d9bdbb52333a01dbaef75db2d1c

SCHUSTER, Daniela, 2021. Forms and Norms of Indecision in Argumentation Theory. Deontic Logic and Normative Systems, 15th International Conference, DEON 2020/2021. München, Jul 21, 2021 - Jul 24, 2021. In: LIU, Fenrong, ed., Alessandra MARRA, ed., Paul PORTNER, ed., Frederik VAN DE PUTTE, ed.. Deontic Logic and Normative Systems, 15th International Conference, DEON 2020/2021. Rickmansworth:College Publications, pp. 394-413. ISBN 978-1-84890-352-4

@inproceedings{Schuster2021Forms-56744, title={Forms and Norms of Indecision in Argumentation Theory}, url={http://www.collegepublications.co.uk/DEON/?00003}, year={2021}, isbn={978-1-84890-352-4}, address={Rickmansworth}, publisher={College Publications}, booktitle={Deontic Logic and Normative Systems, 15th International Conference, DEON 2020/2021}, pages={394--413}, editor={Liu, Fenrong and Marra, Alessandra and Portner, Paul and Van De Putte, Frederik}, author={Schuster, Daniela} }

<rdf:RDF xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:bibo="http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/" xmlns:dspace="http://digital-repositories.org/ontologies/dspace/0.1.0#" xmlns:foaf="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/" xmlns:void="http://rdfs.org/ns/void#" xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#" > <rdf:Description rdf:about="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/rdf/resource/123456789/56744"> <dcterms:isPartOf rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/rdf/resource/123456789/40"/> <dspace:isPartOfCollection rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/rdf/resource/123456789/40"/> <dc:language>eng</dc:language> <dcterms:available rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2022-03-04T12:31:51Z</dcterms:available> <foaf:homepage rdf:resource="http://localhost:8080/jspui"/> <dcterms:abstract xml:lang="eng">One main goal of argumentation theory is to evaluate arguments and to determine whether they should be accepted or rejected. When there is no clear answer, a third option, being undecided, has to be taken into account. Indecision is often not considered explicitly, but rather taken to be a collection of all unclear or troubling cases. However, current philosophy makes a strong point for taking indecision itself to be a proper object of consideration. This paper aims at revealing parallels between the findings concerning indecision in philosophy and the treatment of indecision in argumentation theory. By investigating what philosophical forms and norms of indecision are involved in argumentation theory, we can improve our understanding of the different uncertain evidential situations in argumentation theory.</dcterms:abstract> <dcterms:hasPart rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/bitstream/123456789/56744/3/Schuster_2-f8tljn56wi058.pdf"/> <dc:contributor>Schuster, Daniela</dc:contributor> <dcterms:title>Forms and Norms of Indecision in Argumentation Theory</dcterms:title> <dc:creator>Schuster, Daniela</dc:creator> <dspace:hasBitstream rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/bitstream/123456789/56744/3/Schuster_2-f8tljn56wi058.pdf"/> <dc:date rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2022-03-04T12:31:51Z</dc:date> <dcterms:rights rdf:resource="https://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/"/> <void:sparqlEndpoint rdf:resource="http://localhost/fuseki/dspace/sparql"/> <bibo:uri rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/handle/123456789/56744"/> <dc:rights>terms-of-use</dc:rights> <dcterms:issued>2021</dcterms:issued> </rdf:Description> </rdf:RDF>

Downloads since Mar 4, 2022 (Information about access statistics)

Schuster_2-f8tljn56wi058.pdf 23

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Search KOPS


Browse

My Account