Computational Agents as a Test-Bed to Study the Philosophical Dialogue Model "DE": A Development of Mackenzie's DC

Abstract

This paper reports research concerning a suitable dialogue model for human computer debate. In particular, we consider the adoption of Moore's (1993) utilization of Mackenzie's (1979) game DC, means of using computational agents as the test-bed to facilitate evaluation of the proposed model, and means of using the evaluation results as motivation to further develop a dialogue model, which can prevent fallacious argument and common errors. It is anticipated that this work will contribute toward the development of human computer dialogue, and help to illuminate research issues in the field of dialectics itself.

Assessing debate strategies via computational agents

“…The strategic agent, then, would beg the question were it to answer the challenge with this unacceptable support (cf. Yuan et al 2003). It is therefore reasonable for the challenge strategist to give a non-committal answer rather than to commit the fallacy of question begging.…”

“…The motivation behind this development is that the underlying dialogue model of the debating system is required to have the ability to pick out fallacious argument and common errors when they occur during the course of debate. DE appears advantageous over DC in preventing the fallacy of question begging, inappropriate challenges and the straw man fallacy and appropriate handling of the issue of repetition (Yuan, Moore and Grierson 2003).…”

A human–computer debating system prototype and its dialogue strategies

“…In particular, DE appears advantageous over DC in preventing the fallacy of question begging, inappropriate challenges, and the straw man fallacy and appropriate handling of the issue of repetition. 9 The DE system can be outlined as follows~cf. Ref.…”

“…Concerning the former, we have developed a robust dialogue model 9 and proposed a set of strategies to be utilized with the model. Further, because the computer system we have built can readily be adapted to function with a different dialogue model and/or a different set of strategies, it potentially provides people working in the field of dialectics with a test bed within which they can experiment with new models and new strategies they develop~cf.…”

“…The system is expected to be used to develop students' debating and reasoning skills and domain knowledge. Previous papers 8,9 considered the adoption of the influential dialogue model "DC," 10 and developed a further system, "DE," which, it was argued, can help prevent fallacious arguments and common errors. Here, we seek to further that investigation in several steps.…”