David Hitchcock

Bio: David Hitchcock is an academic researcher from McMaster University. The author has contributed to research in topics: Argument & Argumentation theory. The author has an hindex of 20, co-authored 68 publications receiving 1157 citations. Previous affiliations of David Hitchcock include University of Windsor.

The eightfold way of deliberation dialogue

Abstract: Deliberation dialogues occur when two or more participants seek to jointly agree on an action or a course of action in some situation. We present the first formal framework for such dialogues, grounding it in a theory of deliberative reasoning from the philosophy of argumentation. We further fully articulate the locutions and rules of a formal dialogue game for this model, so as to specify a protocol for deliberation dialogues. The resulting protocol is suitable for dialogues between computational entities, such as autonomous software agents. To assess our protocol, we consider it against various records of human deliberations, against normative principles for the conduct of human dialogues, and with respect to the outcomes produced by dialogues undertaken according to the protocol. © 2007 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Int J Int Syst 22: 95–132, 2007.

A Framework for Deliberation Dialogues

Abstract: Deliberation dialogues involve reasoning about the appropriate course or courses of action for a group to undertake. No models currently exist for the conduct of such dialogues. Beginning with an analysis of the differences between deliberations and other types of dialogue (such as negotiations or information-seeking dialogues), we propose a generic framework in which to develop such models. We then consider various instantiations of our gen eric del iberation fram ework so as to illustrate its applicability.

Evidence Based Practice: Logic And Critical Thinking In Medicine

Abstract: Evidence-Based Practice: Logic and Critical Thinking in Medicine provides easy access to fundamental principles, quickly assimilated techniques, and proven, rigorous application that demonstrates how logic and critical thinking are applied to the medical thinking process. This marriage allows health professionals to understand the critical use of evidence logically and in a structured, methodological way to make medical decisions. Such uses of evidence are the essence of Evidence-Based Practice as reflected in the spirit of this book. In order to ensure better patient outcomes, physicians have to learn how rational, practical uses of evidence allow organized decision-making in practice and research. In a textbook format, Evidence-Based Practice: Logic and Critical Thinking in Medicine offers the reader principles and techniques in Part One. Part Two shows the application of logic and critical thinking to clinical problem solving in practice, medical research, and public health.

Decision Support for Practical Reasoning: a theoretical and computational perspective

Abstract: Practical reasoning is reasoning about what is to be done. A decision on what to do may involve weighing the options open to an individual, taking into account dependencies on the actions of others, or complex collaborative decisionmaking. The role of argument in practical reasoning is explored in this chapter, both from a philosophical and computational perspective. In doing so, we discuss the use of computational systems in assisting people engaged in decision making, and, in particular, we investigate practical reasoning as joint deliberation between the human and decision support system. Such a system, it is argued, facilitates research into the use of argumentation techniques in computational models of practical reasoning, and the use of computational models to evaluate theories of practical reasoning.

Toulmin’s Warrants

Abstract: In The Uses of Argument (1958) proposed a new, dialectically grounded structure for the layout of arguments, replacing the old terminology of “premiss” and “conclusion” with a new set of terms: claim, data (later “grounds”), warrant, modal qualifier, rebuttal, backing. Toulmin’s scheme has been widely adopted in the discipline of speech communication, especially in the United States. In this paper I focus on one component of the scheme, the concept of a warrant. I argue that those who have adopted Toulmin’s scheme have often distorted the concept of warrant in a way which destroys what is distinctive and worthwhile about it. And I respond to criticisms of the concept by (1984), (1996) and (1991). Their criticisms show the need for some revision of Toulmin’s position, but his basic concept of warrant, I shall argue, should be retained as a central concept for the evaluation of arguments.

The Uses Of Argument

Abstract: Thank you very much for downloading the uses of argument. Maybe you have knowledge that, people have search numerous times for their chosen novels like this the uses of argument, but end up in infectious downloads. Rather than reading a good book with a cup of tea in the afternoon, instead they juggled with some malicious bugs inside their computer. the uses of argument is available in our digital library an online access to it is set as public so you can download it instantly. Our digital library hosts in multiple locations, allowing you to get the most less latency time to download any of our books like this one. Merely said, the the uses of argument is universally compatible with any devices to read.