標(biāo)題: Titlebook: Debate Dynamics: How Controversy Improves Our Beliefs; Gregor Betz Book 2013 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013 Argumentation [打印本頁(yè)] 作者: 尤指植物 時(shí)間: 2025-3-21 17:39
書(shū)目名稱(chēng)Debate Dynamics: How Controversy Improves Our Beliefs影響因子(影響力)
書(shū)目名稱(chēng)Debate Dynamics: How Controversy Improves Our Beliefs影響因子(影響力)學(xué)科排名
書(shū)目名稱(chēng)Debate Dynamics: How Controversy Improves Our Beliefs網(wǎng)絡(luò)公開(kāi)度
書(shū)目名稱(chēng)Debate Dynamics: How Controversy Improves Our Beliefs網(wǎng)絡(luò)公開(kāi)度學(xué)科排名
書(shū)目名稱(chēng)Debate Dynamics: How Controversy Improves Our Beliefs被引頻次
書(shū)目名稱(chēng)Debate Dynamics: How Controversy Improves Our Beliefs被引頻次學(xué)科排名
書(shū)目名稱(chēng)Debate Dynamics: How Controversy Improves Our Beliefs年度引用
書(shū)目名稱(chēng)Debate Dynamics: How Controversy Improves Our Beliefs年度引用學(xué)科排名
書(shū)目名稱(chēng)Debate Dynamics: How Controversy Improves Our Beliefs讀者反饋
書(shū)目名稱(chēng)Debate Dynamics: How Controversy Improves Our Beliefs讀者反饋學(xué)科排名
作者: 刺耳 時(shí)間: 2025-3-21 23:29
Synthese Libraryhttp://image.papertrans.cn/d/image/264028.jpg作者: tangle 時(shí)間: 2025-3-22 02:12 作者: 透明 時(shí)間: 2025-3-22 06:26
978-94-017-8426-9Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013作者: BOAST 時(shí)間: 2025-3-22 11:02
General Introduction, probably even older. But what precisely does this alleged improvement we aim at when engaging in a controversy mean? In which sense does the game of giving and taking reasons, presumably, better our beliefs?作者: 散步 時(shí)間: 2025-3-22 14:24 作者: 散步 時(shí)間: 2025-3-22 17:27 作者: 館長(zhǎng) 時(shí)間: 2025-3-22 22:03
Debate Dynamics: How Controversy Improves Our Beliefs978-94-007-4599-5Series ISSN 0166-6991 Series E-ISSN 2542-8292 作者: 沒(méi)有希望 時(shí)間: 2025-3-23 03:29 作者: 腐爛 時(shí)間: 2025-3-23 08:21
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-66739-3ents are introduced randomly and as long as there are no commonly agreed upon background beliefs. In the following, we take background knowledge into account by explicitly fixing the truth values assigned to some of the sentences, and investigate whether this fosters the rapprochement of proponent positions.作者: 搖曳 時(shí)間: 2025-3-23 11:39
Fathers, Sons and Encounters in Dancees. As noted above, the results of these simulations may not be directly scaled up to debates with more than two proponents. This is the reason why we study, in this chapter, debates with six proponents who implement argumentation strategies which are derived from the basic rules previously introduced.作者: sclera 時(shí)間: 2025-3-23 14:09
Dance Presenting and Dramaturgy probably even older. But what precisely does this alleged improvement we aim at when engaging in a controversy mean? In which sense does the game of giving and taking reasons, presumably, better our beliefs?作者: 無(wú)畏 時(shí)間: 2025-3-23 18:59
Dance Presenting and DramaturgySchiex extend the abstract approach of Dung (1995) by adding support relations to Dung’s framework which originally considered attack relations between arguments only. A specific interpretation of Dung’s abstract framework that analyzes arguments as premiss–conclusion structures is carried out in Bo作者: 代理人 時(shí)間: 2025-3-23 22:29
https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137009449ild on each other and follow a consistent line of reasoning. Based on this general orientation, we pinpoint, in Sect.3.2, the different pieces of evidence which back the main results concerning consensus-conduciveness (cf. Sect.1.4) and which are spread all over Part I. Hence, Sect.3.2 shall serve a作者: Coronary-Spasm 時(shí)間: 2025-3-24 02:30 作者: Oafishness 時(shí)間: 2025-3-24 08:46
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-66739-3ents are introduced randomly and as long as there are no commonly agreed upon background beliefs. In the following, we take background knowledge into account by explicitly fixing the truth values assigned to some of the sentences, and investigate whether this fosters the rapprochement of proponent p作者: 砍伐 時(shí)間: 2025-3-24 11:16 作者: Host142 時(shí)間: 2025-3-24 16:32 作者: Kidney-Failure 時(shí)間: 2025-3-24 22:23 作者: 粗鄙的人 時(shí)間: 2025-3-25 00:10
How , Put Me in Touch with Birdsore, which proponents are much more willing to alter. This distinction translated into a modifiedupdate mechanism, namely, the. updating. We have studied the effect of this new updating procedure while retaining the simple. mechanism. Clearly, core beliefs can also be taken into account when putting作者: 同步左右 時(shí)間: 2025-3-25 05:47 作者: Acetaldehyde 時(shí)間: 2025-3-25 08:26
Cyborgs, Nomads and the Raving Femininey and proponents opt for the closest coherent position. The simple simulations shall serve as a foil with which we may contrast later, more sophisticated debate dynamics. Moreover, we investigate, in this chapter, the verisimilitude evolutions in the simulated random debates, while taking into accou作者: 小溪 時(shí)間: 2025-3-25 12:20 作者: 條街道往前推 時(shí)間: 2025-3-25 17:05 作者: 建筑師 時(shí)間: 2025-3-25 23:58
Dance on Film: Strategy and Serendipitytic dynamics. In this chapter, we will investigate whether this holds for many-proponent debates as well. In order to do so, we take the two mosttruth-conducive argumentation rules studied so far—. and.—and modify them with a view to many-proponent debates. Specifically, the modified . rule (.) tell作者: assail 時(shí)間: 2025-3-26 04:02
Dance on Film: Strategy and Serendipityy to Chap. 8, that a subset of the sentence pool contains the debate’score theses. Proponents are, accordingly, particularly reluctant to modify their convictions regarding these central claims and prefer, rather, to adjust the truth value assignments vis-à-vis the auxiliary sentences outside the de作者: FEAS 時(shí)間: 2025-3-26 05:21
It Goes Without Saying — But Not Alwayson strategies that take the distinction between core and auxiliary sentences explicitly into account. More specifically, we modify, firstly, the highlytruth-conducive. strategy (cf. Chap. 14) with a view to a debate’score sentences and reconsider, secondly, the argumentation strategy which instructs作者: Frisky 時(shí)間: 2025-3-26 09:45
Debate Dynamics: How Controversy Improves Our Beliefs作者: doxazosin 時(shí)間: 2025-3-26 14:57 作者: IRK 時(shí)間: 2025-3-26 19:37 作者: Concrete 時(shí)間: 2025-3-26 22:37 作者: 虛構(gòu)的東西 時(shí)間: 2025-3-27 03:52 作者: 箴言 時(shí)間: 2025-3-27 06:28 作者: geometrician 時(shí)間: 2025-3-27 12:48 作者: Diverticulitis 時(shí)間: 2025-3-27 17:17 作者: 信條 時(shí)間: 2025-3-27 19:41 作者: cataract 時(shí)間: 2025-3-28 00:25
Introduction to Part Iild on each other and follow a consistent line of reasoning. Based on this general orientation, we pinpoint, in Sect.3.2, the different pieces of evidence which back the main results concerning consensus-conduciveness (cf. Sect.1.4) and which are spread all over Part I. Hence, Sect.3.2 shall serve a作者: Paradox 時(shí)間: 2025-3-28 04:20
The Consensual Dynamics of Simple Random Debatesuments are constructed randomly, and proponents adopt the coherent position which is closest to their previous one. These simulations will serve to scrutinize a simple hypothesis, which says that the overall consensus reached in a debate at some step . depends on two factors: (1) the initial agreeme作者: 畫(huà)布 時(shí)間: 2025-3-28 07:01
The Consensual Dynamics of Random Debates with Explicit Background Knowledgeents are introduced randomly and as long as there are no commonly agreed upon background beliefs. In the following, we take background knowledge into account by explicitly fixing the truth values assigned to some of the sentences, and investigate whether this fosters the rapprochement of proponent p作者: 重力 時(shí)間: 2025-3-28 13:25 作者: forbid 時(shí)間: 2025-3-28 18:22
The Consensual Dynamics of Argumentation Strategies in Many-Proponent Debateses. As noted above, the results of these simulations may not be directly scaled up to debates with more than two proponents. This is the reason why we study, in this chapter, debates with six proponents who implement argumentation strategies which are derived from the basic rules previously introduc作者: compassion 時(shí)間: 2025-3-28 20:28
The Consensual Dynamics of Debates with Core Updating and others as less important. If they could, for example, reestablish coherency by changing exactly one truth-value assignment, they were indifferent as to which belief they give up. But this, it seems, doesn t hold in real controversies, where proponents frequently possess some convictions which t作者: refine 時(shí)間: 2025-3-28 22:58 作者: IRK 時(shí)間: 2025-3-29 05:22 作者: 場(chǎng)所 時(shí)間: 2025-3-29 07:23 作者: Lymphocyte 時(shí)間: 2025-3-29 13:27 作者: 改良 時(shí)間: 2025-3-29 17:01
Comparing the Veritistic Dynamics of Four Proponent-Specific Argumentation Strategies in Dualistic De assumption that arguments are introduced randomly into the debate and suppose that proponents put forward arguments in line with a specific argumentation strategy they pursue. In close analogy to our investigation in ., we distinguish and study four argumentation rules:.,.,., and.. We simulate deb作者: 肌肉 時(shí)間: 2025-3-29 21:03
The Veritistic Dynamics of Argumentation Strategies in Many-Proponent Debatestic dynamics. In this chapter, we will investigate whether this holds for many-proponent debates as well. In order to do so, we take the two mosttruth-conducive argumentation rules studied so far—. and.—and modify them with a view to many-proponent debates. Specifically, the modified . rule (.) tell作者: commodity 時(shí)間: 2025-3-30 03:22
The Veritistic Dynamics of Debates with Core Updatingy to Chap. 8, that a subset of the sentence pool contains the debate’score theses. Proponents are, accordingly, particularly reluctant to modify their convictions regarding these central claims and prefer, rather, to adjust the truth value assignments vis-à-vis the auxiliary sentences outside the de作者: 滔滔不絕地說(shuō) 時(shí)間: 2025-3-30 04:47 作者: Pert敏捷 時(shí)間: 2025-3-30 10:43 作者: 遭受 時(shí)間: 2025-3-30 12:49
Comparing the Veritistic Dynamics of Four Proponent-Specific Argumentation Strategies in Dualistic Dates with two proponents and examine how thetruth-conduciveness of controversial argumentation depends on the strategies chosen by the proponents. In the next chapter, we will extend this analysis to multiproponent debates.作者: 技術(shù) 時(shí)間: 2025-3-30 19:14
The Veritistic Dynamics of Debates with Core Argumentation a proponent to maximize the degree of justification of her core position (see Chap. 9). One of our chief interests consists in investigating whether a core position’s robustness remains an accurate indicator of truth when proponents employ the sophisticated argumentation strategies.作者: 啟發(fā) 時(shí)間: 2025-3-30 22:01
Linda E. Dankworth,Ann R. Daviderential density and initial agreement typically generate a full consensus. A more detailed analysis of the simulation uncovers that the dynamic geometry of the space of coherent positions exerts a pivotal influence on consensus evolution in a debate.作者: nullify 時(shí)間: 2025-3-31 01:39
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-95699-2. The corroborating findings are spread all over Part?II. So, Sect.?. links the condensed results reported in the general introduction to the specific simulation studies and analyses carried out in Part?II.作者: IRK 時(shí)間: 2025-3-31 07:33 作者: anagen 時(shí)間: 2025-3-31 11:10 作者: coltish 時(shí)間: 2025-3-31 15:45
Introduction to Part II. The corroborating findings are spread all over Part?II. So, Sect.?. links the condensed results reported in the general introduction to the specific simulation studies and analyses carried out in Part?II.作者: Servile 時(shí)間: 2025-3-31 19:31 作者: 廚師 時(shí)間: 2025-3-31 22:10
0166-6991 etical implications of truth- and consensus-conduciveness ofIs critical argumentation an effective way to overcome disagreement? And does the exchange of arguments bring opponents in a controversy closer to the truth? This study provides a new perspective on these pivotal questions. By means of mult作者: 煩躁的女人 時(shí)間: 2025-4-1 02:23
