This chapter discusses abstract argumentation, which is concerned with ascribing arguments a status, that is, determining whether some arguments of interest can be accepted or, on the contrary, refuted. The main defect of abstract argumentation is that some situations are given the same formalization even though they convey argumentative content which is intuitively dissimilar. Another disadvantage can be put in the following way: Even though an abstract view of the notion of attacks between arguments may intuitively impose it as a nonsymmetric relation, such an intuition is wrong, as some natural symmetric attack relations exist that make the formalization by argument frameworks collapse.
MIT Press Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.
If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.
To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs, and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us.