The Polish School of Argumentation: A Manifesto (original) (raw)

Abstract

Building on our diverse research traditions in the study of reasoning, language and communication, the Polish School of Argumentation integrates various disciplines and institutions across Poland in which scholars are dedicated to understanding the phenomenon of the force of argument. Our primary goal is to craft a methodological programme and establish organisational infrastructure: this is

Loading...

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

References (108)

  1. Ajdukiewicz K. 1974. Pragmatic logic. Trans. O. Wojtasiewicz. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.
  2. Austin, J.L. 1962. How to do things with words. Oxford: Clarendon.
  3. Barłowska, M., I. Bartoszewicz, B. Bogołe ¸bska, L. Drong, W. Godzic, J. Jabłon ´ska-Bonca, J. Lichan ´ski, M. Lisowska-Magdziarz, C. Mielczarski, P. Nehring, and A. Smuszkiewicz. 2011. Wyzwania K. Budzynska et al. wspo ´łczesnej kultury wobec retoryki-wielogłos [Challenges of contemporary culture against rhetoric-Multiple voice].
  4. Forum Artis Rhetoricae 2(25): 15-38.
  5. Bogołe ¸bska B. 2006. Konteksty stylistyczne i retoryczne [Stylistic and rhetorical contexts]. Ło ´dz ´Piktor.
  6. Bryniarski, E., Z. Bonikowski, J. Waldmajer, and U. Wybraniec-Skardowska. 2011. Realistic premises of epistemic argumentation for dynamic epistemic logics. Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric 23 (36): 173-187.
  7. Budzynska K. 2011. Araucaria-PL: Software for teaching argumentation theory. Proceedings of the 3rd International Congress on tools for teaching logic (TICTTL 2011), LNAI 6680, 30-37. New York: Springer.
  8. Budzynska K. 2013. Circularity in ethotic structures. Synthese, 190(15): 3185-3207, 2013. First published in 2012 under Open Access: DOI 10.1007/s11229-012-0135-6.
  9. Budzynska, K., K. Debowska-Kozlowska, M. Kacprzak, and M. Załe ¸ska. 2012. Interdyscyplinarnos ´c ´w badaniach nad argumentacja ¸i perswazja ¸[Interdisciplinarity in the studies on argumentation and persuasion].
  10. Budzynska, K., M. Kacprzak, and P. Rembelski. 2009. Perseus. Software for analyzing persuasion process. Fundamenta Informaticae 93(1-3): 65-79.
  11. Budzynska, K., F.H. van Eemeren, and M. Koszowy, eds. 2014. Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric, Special issue on Pragmatics and Dialectics of Argument, Vol. 36(49).
  12. Budzynska, K., and M. Witek. 2014. Non-inferential aspects of ad hominem and ad baculum. In Argumentation, special issue "The Polish School of Argumentation", eds. K. Budzynska and M. Koszowy, Vol. 3, this issue.
  13. Cap, P. 2013. Proximization: The pragmatics of symbolic distance crossing. Amsterdam-Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
  14. Debowska-Kozlowska K. 2014. Processing topics from the Beneficial Cognitive Model in partially and over-successful persuasion dialogues. In Argumentation, special issue "The Polish School of Argumentation", eds. K. Budzynska and M. Koszowy, Vol. 3, this issue.
  15. Dignum, F., B. Dunin-Ke ¸plicz, and R. Verbrugge. 2001. Creating collective intention through dialogue. Logic Journal of the IGPL 9: 145-158.
  16. Dobrosielski. M. 1957. Logika i retoryka [Logic and rhetoric].
  17. Warszawa. Doman ´ski, H., M. Federowicz, A. Pokropek, D. Przybysz, M. Sitek, M. Smulczyk, and T. Z ´o ´łtak. 2012. From school to work: Individual and institutional determinants of educational and occupational career trajectories of young Poles. ASK: Research & Methods 21(1): 123-141.
  18. Dunin-Ke ¸plicz, B., and A. Strachocka. 2013. Perceiving rules under incomplete and inconsistent information. In Computational logic in multi-agent systems, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 8143, 256-272.
  19. Dunin-Ke ¸plicz, B., and R. Verbrugge. 2010. Teamwork in multi-agent systems: A formal approach. New York: Wiley.
  20. Dziubin ´ski, M., and S. Goyal. 2013. Network design and defence. Games and Economic Behavior 79(1): 30-43.
  21. Garbacz, P., P. Kulicki, and R. Trypuz. 2012. A formal ontology of knowing and knowledge. Knowledge Management Research & Practice 10: 206-226.
  22. Gizbert-Studnicki, T. 2010. The burden of argumentation in legal disputes. Ratio Juris 3(1): 118-129.
  23. Gomolin ´ska. A. 2005. On rough judgment making by socio-cognitive agents. In Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE//WIC//ACM International Conference on Intelligent Agent Technology (IAT'2005), eds. A. Skowron et al., 421-427, Los Alamitos, CA. IEEE Computer Society Press. Go ´rski J. 1559. De generibus dicendi liber. Krakow.
  24. Grabowski, A. 1999. Judicial argumentation and pragmatics: A study on the extension of the theory of legal argumentation. Krakow: Ksie ¸garnia Akademicka.
  25. Grabowski, A. 2003. Sonderfallthese-its critique and interpretation. Rechtstheorie 34: 371-392.
  26. Groarke L. 2013. Informal logic. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Winter 2003 Edition. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/logic-informal/.
  27. Hoło ´wka, T. 1998. Błȩdy, spory, argumenty [Fallacies, disputes, arguments]. Warszawa: Wydział Filozofii i Socjologii Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego.
  28. Hoło ´wka T. 2007. Kultura logiczna w przykładach [Logical education in examples]. Warszawa: PWN.
  29. Jochemczyk, Ł., and A. Nowak. 2010. Constructing a network of shared agreement: A model of communication processes in negotiations. Group Decision and Negotiation 19(6): 591-620.
  30. The Polish School of Argumentation: A Manifesto Kacprzak M., M. Dziubin ´ski, and K. Budzynska. 2014. Strategies in dialogues: A game-theoretic approach. In Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications. Proc. of 5th International Conference on Computational Models of Argument COMMA 2014, IOS Press, accepted for publication.
  31. Kacprzak, M., and A. Sawicka. 2014. Identification of formal fallacies in a natural dialogue. Fundamenta Informaticae 133: 1-15.
  32. Kacprzak, M., and O.Yaskorska. 2014. Dialogue protocols for formal fallacies. In Argumentation, special issue "The Polish School of Argumentation", eds. K. Budzynska and M. Koszowy, Vol. 3, this issue.
  33. Kawalec, P. 2003. Structural reliabilism: Inductive logic as a theory of justification. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
  34. Kawalec, P. 2012. Bayesianizm w polskiej tradycji probabilizmu-studium stanowiska Kazimierza Ajdukiewicza [Bayesianism in the Polish tradition of probabilism: A study of Kazimierz Ajdukiewicz's conception]. Ruch Filozoficzny 1: 111-122.
  35. Kielar, M. 2011. Transitivity as a marker of valuation in journalistic discourse. In On Words and Sounds: A Selection of Papers from the 40th PLM, ed. K. Debowska-Kozlowska, and K. Dziubalska- Kołaczyk, 311-322. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Publishing.
  36. Kisielewicz. A. 2011. Sztuczna inteligencja i logika [Artificial Intelligence and Logic]. Warszawa: WNT.
  37. Konarski. S. 1767. O sztuce dobrego mys ´lenia do sztuki dobrej wymowy [On the art of good thinking and good speech].
  38. Koszowy. M, ed. 2009. Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric, Special Issue on Informal Logic and Argumentation Theory, Vol. 16(29).
  39. Koszowy. M, ed. 2011. Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric, Special Issue on Argument and Computation, Vol. 23(36).
  40. Koszowy, M., and M. Araszkiewicz. 2014. The Lvov-Warsaw School as a source of inspiration for argumentation theory. In Argumentation, special issue "The Polish School of Argumentation", eds. K. Budzynska and M. Koszowy, Vol. 3, this issue.
  41. Kublikowski. R. 2009. Definition within the structure of argumentation. In Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric, Special Issue on Informal Logic and Argumentation Theory, ed. M. Koszowy, Vol. 16 (29), 229-244.
  42. Kuzio, A. 2014. The exploitation of schemata in persuasive and manipulative discourse in Polish, English and Russian. Newscastle-upon-Tyne: Cambridge Scholar Publishing.
  43. Lewin ´ski, P. 2012. Neosofistyka. Argumentacja retoryczna w komunikacji potocznej [Neosophistry. Rhetorical argumentation in every day communication]. Wrocław: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Wrocławskiego.
  44. Lichan ´ski. J. 2003. Retoryka w Polsce. Studia o historii, nauczaniu i teorii w czasach I Rzeczypospolitej [Rhetoric in Poland. Studies on history, teaching and theory in times of the First Republic of Poland]. Warszawa: DiG.
  45. Malinowski, J. 2003. Pragmatic interpretation of utterances. Logic and Logical Philosophy 11: 115-127.
  46. Małuszyn ´ski, J., and A. Szałas. 2013. Partiality and inconsistency in agents belief bases. KES-AMSTA, Frontiers of Artificial Intelligence and Applications 252: 3-17.
  47. Marciszewski, W. 1994a. Logic from a Rhetorical Point of View. Berlin: De Gruyter.
  48. Marciszewski, W. 1994b. Sztuka rozumowania w świetle logiki [The art of reasoning from the perspective of logic]. Warszawa: Aleph.
  49. Mayakowska, M. 1936. Klasyczna teoria wymowy [Classic theory of speech].
  50. Warszawa. Nieznan ´ski, E. 2010. Sylogizm prawniczy z logicznego punktu widzenia [Legal syllogism from the point of view of logic]. Edukacja prawnicza 3: 15-16.
  51. Nowak, L. 1973. Interpretacja prawnicza: problemy metodologiczne [Legal Interpretation: Methodolog- ical Problems]. Warszawa: PWN.
  52. Patryas, W. 1988. Interpretacja karnistyczna. Studium metodologiczne [Penal-Legal Interpretation. A Methodological Study].
  53. Poznan ´: Wydawnictwo Naukowe UAM.
  54. Pawlak, Z. 1982. Rough sets. International Journal of Parallel Programming 11(5): 341-356. doi: 10.1007/BF01001956.
  55. Peczenik, A. 1966. Wartość naukowa dogmatyki prawa: praca z zakresu porównawczej metodologii nauki prawa [The Scientific Value of Legal Science: A Work in Comparative Methodology of Legal Science]. Krakow: Uniwersytet Jagiellon ´ski.
  56. Peczenik, A. 1988. Legal reasoning as a special case of moral reasoning. Ratio Juris 1: 123-136.
  57. Peczenik, A. 2008. On law and reason, 2nd ed. (with preface by Jaap C. Hage). New York: Springer.
  58. Peczenik, A. , Wro ´blewski. J. 1985. Fuzziness and transformations: Towards explaining legal reasoning. Theoria LI:24-44.
  59. Pelc, J. 1969. Meaning as an instrument. Semiotica 1(1): 26-98.
  60. Pelc, J. 1970. A functional approach to the logical semiotics of natural language. In Sign, Language, Culture, 89-112.
  61. Pogonowski, J. 2011. Operacje na argumentacjach [Operations on arguments]. Investigationes Linguis- ticae XXIII:148-169.
  62. Pogonowski, J. 2012. Kilka uwag o intuicji matematycznej [A few remarks about mathematical intuition].
  63. Filozofia Nauki 2(78): 107-113.
  64. Puczyłowski, T. 2012. O argumentacji odwołuja ¸cej sie ¸do implikatury konwersacyjnej [On argumentation appealing to conversational implicature]. Przeglaḑ Filozoficzny 3(83): 93-110.
  65. Rytel, J. 2012. Reaching an agreement: Argumentation in preschoolers' narrative discourse. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Uniwerstytetu Kardynała Stefana Wyszyn ´skiego.
  66. Searle, J. 1969. Speech Acts: An essay in the philosophy of language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  67. Selinger. M. 2014. Towards formal representation and evaluation of arguments. In Argumentation, special issue "The Polish School of Argumentation", eds. K. Budzynska and M. Koszowy, Vol. 3, this issue.
  68. Skowron, A., M.K. Chakraborty, J.M. Grzymala-Busse, V.W. Marek, S.K. Pal, J.E. Peters, G. Rozenberg, D. Slezak, R. Slowinski, S. Tsumoto, A. Wakulicz-Deja, G. Wang, and W. Ziarko. 2013. Professor Zdzisław Pawlak (1926-2006): Founder of the Polish School of Artificial Intelligence. In Rough sets and Intelligent systems. Professor Zdzislaw Pawlak in Memoriam, series intelligent systems reference library, eds. Andrzej Skowron and Zbigniew Suraj, Vol. 42, 1-56. New York: Springer.
  69. Skulska. J. 2013. Schematy argumentacji Waltona jako metodologiczna podstawa analizy je ¸zyka nauk politycznych w płaszczyz ´nie bezpieczen ´stwa pan ´stwa [Walton's argumentation schemes as a methodology for analysing language of political sciences]. In Studia Bezpieczeństwa Narodowego [National Security Studies], eds. A. Warchał and C. Son ´ta, Vol. 4.
  70. Skwara. M. 2006. Retoryka w Polsce. Teoria i praktyka w ostatnim półwieczu [Rhetoric in Poland. Theory and practice in the last half a century]. Szczecin: Uniwersytet Szczecin ´ski.
  71. Smolak M. 2003. Uzasadnianie saḑowe jako argumentacja z moralności politycznej. O legitymizacji władzy sȩdziowskiej [Judicial justification as a moral-political argumentation]. Krakow: Zakamycze.
  72. Soko ´ł M. 2010. Questions and the authors' self-presentation in academic electronic discourse. In Komunikacja miȩdzyludzka. Leksyka. Semantyka, Pragmatyka, eds. E. Komorowska, K. Kondzioła- Pich, and E. Panter, 235-241, Szczecin: Volumina.
  73. Sowin ´ska, A. 2013. A critical discourse approach to the analysis of values in political discourse: The example of freedom in President Bushs State of the Union addresses (2001-2008). Discourse & Society 24(6): 792-809.
  74. Stalmaszczyk, P. 2013. Interdyscyplinarne i metodologiczne inspiracje w je ˛zykoznawstwie strukturalnym i generatywnym [Interdisciplinary and methodological inspirations in structural and generative linguistics].
  75. Przeglaḑ Humanistyczny 5: 39-49.
  76. Stawecki T. 2012. Argument against absurdity of legal reasoning-Fundamental, subsidiary or rhetoric? In Argumentation 2012. International Conference on Alternative Methods of Argumentation in Law, eds. M. Araszkiewicz, M. Myska, T. Smejkalova, J. Savelka, and M. Skop, 89-103, Brno: Masarykova univerzita.
  77. Stepaniuk, J. 2008. Rough-granular computing in knowledge discovery and data mining. New York: Springer.
  78. Suchon ´, W. 2005. Prolegomena do retoryki logicznej [Prolegomena to logical rhetoric]. Krakow: Jagiellonian University Press.
  79. Suchon ´, W. 2008. Teoretyczne problemy logiki praktycznej [Theoretical problems of practical logic]. Krakow: Jagiellonian University Press.
  80. Szymanek, K. 2001. Sztuka argumentacji. Słownik terminologiczny [The art of argument: A terminological dictionary]. Warszawa: PWN.
  81. Szymanek, K. 2009. Argument z podobieństwa [Argument by similarity (analogy)]. Katowice: University of Silesia Press.
  82. Tokarz, M. 1985. Goals, results and efficiency of utterances. Bulletin of the Section of Logic 14(4): 150- 155.
  83. Tokarz, M. 1987. Persuasion. Bulletin of the Section of Logic 16(1): 46-49.
  84. Tokarz, M. 2006. Argumentacja, perswazja, manipulacja [Argumentation, persuasion, manipulation]. Gdan ´sk: Gdan ´skie Wydawnictwo Psychologiczne.
  85. Tomczyk, J. 2011. Civil society: historia poje ¸cia, znaczenie idei [Civil society: History of the notion, significance of the idea]. In Tolerancja, eds. A. Roso ´ł and M.S. Szczepan ´ski, 46-51.
  86. Trybulec, A. 1978. The Mizar-QC/6000 logic information language. ALLC Bulletin, 6(2): 136-140.
  87. Urban ´ski, M. 2001. Synthetic tableaux and erotetic search scenarios: Extension and extraction. Logique et Analyse 173: 69-91.
  88. Urban ´ski, M. 2009. Trzy modele rozumowan ´abdukcyjnych [Three models of abductive reasoning].
  89. van Eemeren, F.H., B. Garssen, B. Verheij, E.C.W. Krabbe, A.F. Snoeck Henkemans, and J.H.M. Wagemans. 2015. Handbook of argumentation theory. New York: Springer.
  90. Walton, D., and E. Krabbe. 1995. Commitment in Dialogue: Basic Concepts of Interpersonal Reasoning. New York: State University of N.Y. Press.
  91. Wasilewska-Kamin ´ska. E. 2014. Myślenie krytyczne jako cel kształcenia w systemach edukacyjnych USA i Kanady. Analiza wybranych programów i metod nauczania myślenia krytycznego. [Critical Thinking as an Educational Goal in the USA and Canada. The Analysis of Selected Critical Thinking Instruction Methods. (Implications for Polish Education)]. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Warsaw.
  92. Wieczorek K.A. 2007. Dlaczego wnioskujemy niepoprawnie. Teoria modeli mentalnych P.N. Johnsona- Lairda [Why do we make mistakes in our reasoning. Johnson-Laird's theory of mental models].
  93. Filozofia Nauki 4:111-134.
  94. Wieczorek K.A. 2013. Argumenty równi pochyłej. Analiza z perspektywy logiki nieformalnej [Slippery slope arguments. The analysis from the perspective of informal logic]. Katowice: University of Silesia Press.
  95. Wis ´niewski, A. 1996. The logic of questions as a theory of erotetic arguments. Synthese 109(1): 1-25.
  96. Witek, M. 2013. How to establish authority with words. In Theory of imperatives from different points of view, eds. A. Brozek et al., Vol. 2, 145-157.
  97. Wo ´jcicki, R. 1997. The postwar panorama of logic in Poland. In Logic and Scientific Methods, eds. M.L. Dalla Chiara et al., 497-508. New York: Kluwer.
  98. Wolen ´ski, J. 1972. Logiczne problemy wykładni prawa [Logical Problems of Legal Interpretation]. Krakow: Uniwersytet Jagiellon ´ski.
  99. Wolen ´ski J. 2013. Lvov-Warsaw School. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Winter 2003 Edition. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/lvov-warsaw/.
  100. Wolen ´ski, J., and S. Lapointe. 2009. Introduction. In The Golden Age of Polish Philosophy: Kazimierz Twardowski's Philosophical Legacy, eds. S. Lapointe, J. Wolen ´ski, M. Marion, and W. Miskiewicz, 1-16. Dordrecht: Springer.
  101. Wro ´blewski, J. 1992. The judicial application of law. New York: Springer.
  102. Wybraniec-Skardowska U. 2010. Wyro ´z ˙nione zasady argumentacyjne w dyskursie politycznym [Certain argument principles in political discourse].
  103. Yaskorska, O., K. Budzynska, and M. Kacprzak. 2013. Proving propositional tautologies in a natural dialogue. Fundamenta Informaticae 128(1-2): 239-253.
  104. Załe ¸ska, M. 2011. Ad hominem in the criticisms of expert argumentation. In Proceedings of the 7th Conference of the International Society for the Study of Argumentation, ed. F.H. van Eemeren, B. Garssen, D. Godden, and G. Mitchell, 2047-2057, Amsterdam: Sic Sat. Załe ¸ska M. 2012. Rhetoric and politics: Central/Eastern European perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
  105. Zielin ´ski, M., Ziembin ´ski, Z. 1988. Uzasadnianie twierdzeń, ocen i norm w prawoznawstwie [Justification of statements, values and norms in jurisprudence]. Warszawa: PWN.
  106. Ziembin ´ski, Z. 1955. Logika praktyczna [Practical logic]. Warszawa: PWN. Ziembin ´ski, Z. 1966. Logiczne podstawy prawoznawstwa: wybrane zagadnienia [The Logical Founda- tions of Jurisprudence: Selected Issues]. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Prawnicze. (English edition: Practical Logic, Dordrecht: D. Reidel Pub. Co, 1976).
  107. Ziomek, J. 1990. Retoryka opisowa [Descriptive rhetoric]. Wroclaw: Ossolineum.
  108. Z ˙urek, T., and M. Araszkiewicz. 2013. Modelling teleological interpretation. In Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law (ICAIL 2013), ed. E. Francesconi, and B. Verheij, 160-168. New York: ACM.