Building A General Theory of Meta‐Argumentation

Hovhannisyan, Hasmik; Dwiputra, Robert

doi:10.1111/meta.12242

Cited by 5 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Hasmik H. Hovhannisyan, proposing the idea that the use of the term "meta" is applicable in the field of argumentation, presented her understanding of meta-argumentation, tried to solve the problem of the relationship between argumentation, meta-argumentation as a theory and meta-theory (Hovhannisyan, H. H., 2007. Later research has revealed the meta-theoretical difficulties (aporias) in the construction and interpretation of theories in the field of modern natural sciences and humanities (Hovhannisyan, H. H. & Djidjian, 2017).…”

Section: Elements Of the Argumentative Discoursementioning

confidence: 99%

Theoretical-Methodological Achievements of the Yerevan School for Argumentation

Hovhannisyan¹

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Yerevan School for Argumentation (YSA) perhaps is the most brilliant manifestation of Armenian philosophical thought. Moreover, it is one of the remarkable results of the centuries-old Armenian philo- sophical culture that has gained world recognition. In the 18th (Brighton 1988; see: Brutian, G., 1988) and 19th (Moscow, 1993) World Congresses of Philosophy organized by the Federation of International Socie- ties for Philosophy, Academician Georg Brutian, the founder and head of the YSA, was entrusted with organizing and chairing Round tables on the discussion of the modern theory of argumentation organized within the framework of these conferences. Brutian?s fundamental publications served as the basis for the directions of the School. They put for- ward principles concerning the definition of argumentation, the structure of argumentation, the language of argumentation, the role of logic, and means of persuasion in the structure of argumentation, the rules of political argumentation, etc. The goal of the present work is to analyze and generalize the theoretical-methodological and conceptu- al results and approaches developed in the YSA, to examine their role in the system of modern philosophi- cal and logical theorems, as well as in the modern theories of argumentation, to present the frame of argu- mentation discourse and its methodological analysis developed in the School, to review the questions of the theory of meta-argumentation, to analyze the history and theoretical-methodological bases of for- mation and institutionalization of the YSA in the context of the developments of the world philosophical thought and the aspect of its contribution to world scientific thought, to suggest a general conception of scientific achievements of the School by a comparative analysis concerning other international centres.

show abstract

Section: Elements Of the Argumentative Discoursementioning

confidence: 99%

Theoretical-Methodological Achievements of the Yerevan School for Argumentation

Hovhannisyan¹

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Deontic meta-rules

Olivieri,

Governatori,

Cristani

et al. 2023

Journal of Logic and Computation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The use of meta-rules in logic, i.e., rules whose content includes other rules, has recently gained attention in the setting of non-monotonic reasoning: a first logical formalisation and efficient algorithms to compute the (meta)-extensions of such theories were proposed in Olivieri et al. (2021, Computing defeasible meta-logic. In JELIA 2021, LNCS, vol. 12678, pp. 69–84. Springer.). This work extends such a logical framework by considering the deontic aspect. The resulting logic will not just be able to model policies but also tackle well-known aspects that occur in numerous legal systems. The use of Defeasible Logic to model meta-rules in the application area we just alluded to has been investigated. Within this line of research, the study mentioned above was not focusing on the general computational properties of meta-rules. This study fills this gap with two major contributions. First, we introduce and formalise two variants of Defeasible Deontic Logic (DDL) with meta-rules to represent (i) defeasible meta-theories with deontic modalities and (ii) two different types of conflicts among rules: Simple Conflict DDL and Cautious Conflict DDL. Second, we advance efficient algorithms to compute the extensions for both variants.

show abstract

Axioms of Philosophy in Aristotle’s Metaphysics

Djijian

Hovhannisyan

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The goal of this article is to study Aristotle’s concept of philosophical principles. Metaphysics required from a philosopher to reveal the axioms of his teaching. It declared the law of contradiction as the most certain of all principles and axioms. This article proves that Aristotelian definition of truth makes it necessary to accept the ontological formulations of all the three main laws of thought as axioms of first philosophy. This article points out the absence of any reference in Metaphysics on Categorias and vice versa. This circumstance questions if could Aristotle be the author of the both works? Authors of this article underline that the modern trend of meta-philosophical studies requires investigating the possibility of building the system of axiomatic philosophy.

show abstract

Building A General Theory of Meta‐Argumentation

Cited by 5 publications

References 14 publications

Theoretical-Methodological Achievements of the Yerevan School for Argumentation

Theoretical-Methodological Achievements of the Yerevan School for Argumentation

Deontic meta-rules

Axioms of Philosophy in Aristotle’s Metaphysics

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About