DOUGLAS WALTON
| HOME | PAPERS | BOOKS | BIO | CV | LINKS | TALKS |
PAPERS
Please note: you will need the "Free"
Acrobat Reader to read these papers.
Formalization of the Ad Hominem Argumentation Scheme
Journal of Applied Logic, 8, 2010, 1-21 [uncorrected preprint posted] doi:10.1016/j.jal.2008.07.002
Argument Visualization Tools for Corroborative Evidence
Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Evidence Law and Forensic Science, Institute of Evidence Law and Forensic Science, Beijing, 2009, 32-49.
Classification and Ambiguity: The Role of Definition in a Conceptual System
Douglas Walton and Fabrizio Macagno, Informal Logic and Argumentation Theory, Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric, ed. Marcin Kosowy, Bialystok, University of Bialystok, 2009, 245-264.
Defeasible Reasoning and Informal Fallacies
Synthese, to appear [uncorrected preprint posted]. Preprint: http://www.springerlink.com/content/h7119u1701228221/
Enthymemes and Argumentation Schemes in Health Product Ads
Proceedings of the Workshop W5: Computational Models of Natural Argument, Twenty-First International Joint Conference on Artifical Intelligence, Pasadena, 2009, 49-56.
Enthymemes, Argumentation Schemes and Topics
Douglas Walton and Fabrizio Macagno, Logique et Analyse, 52, no. 205, 2009, 215-243 [uncorrected preprint posted].
Explanations and Arguments Based on Practical Reasoning
Proceedings of Workshop W10: Explanation-Aware Computing, Twenty-First International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Pasadena, 2009, 72-83.
Legal Reasoning with Argumentation Schemes
Thomas F. Gordon and Douglas Walton, 12th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, ed. Carole D. Hafner, New York, Association for Computing Machinery, 2009, 137-146.
Dialectical Shifts Underlying Arguments from Consequences
Informal Logic, 29, 2009, 54-83 [uncorrected preprint posted]. Published version: http://www.informallogic.ca
An Overview of the Use of Argumentation Schemes in Case Modeling
Modelling Legal Cases: Workshop Co-located with the 12th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, ed. Katie Atkinson, Barcelona, Huygens Editorial, 2009, 77-90 [uncorrected preprint posted].
Jumping to a Conclusion: Fallacies and Standards of Proof
Douglas Walton and Thomas F. Gordon, Informal Logic, 29, 2009, 215-243 [uncorrected preprint posted]. Published version: http://www.informallogic.ca
Reasoning from Classifications and Definitions
Douglas Walton and Fabrizio Macagno, Argumentation, 23, 2009, 81-107 [uncorrected preprint posted]. Published version: http://www.springerlink.com/content/k1341517262861h7/
Objections, Rebuttals and Refutations
Paper from the 8th OSSA Conference (Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation), Windsor, Ontario, June 4, 2009.
Argumentation Theory: A Very Short Introduction
Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence, ed. Iyad Rahwan and Guillermo Simari,Berlin, Springer, 2009, 1-24 [book flyer] .
Proof Burdens and Standards
Thomas F. Gordon and Douglas Walton, Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence, ed. Iyad Rahwan and Guillermo Simari,Berlin, Springer, 2009, 239-260 [book flyer] .
Argument from Analogy in Law, the Classical Tradition, and Recent Theories
Fabrizio Macagno and Douglas Walton, Philosophy & Rhetoric, 42, 2009, 154-182 [abstract].
Arguing from Definition to Verbal Classification: The Case of Redefining 'Planet' to Exclude Pluto
Informal Logic, 28, 2008, 129-154. Published version: http://ojs.uwindsor.ca/ojsleddy/index.php/informal_logic/issue/view/77
Anticipating Objections in Argumentation
Rhetoric and Argumentation in the Beginning of the XXIst Century, ed Henrique Jales Ribeiro,University of Coimbra Press, Coimbra, Portugal, 2009, 87-109 [uncorrected preprint posted] .
Evaluating Corroborative Evidence
Douglas Walton and Chris Reed, Argumentation, 22, 2008, 531-553 [uncorrected preprint posted]. Published version: http://www.springerlink.com/content/327683g16l362v8u/
A Dialogical Theory of Presumption
Artficial Intelligence and Law, 16, 2008, 209-243 [uncorrected preprint posted]. Published version: http://www.springerlink.com/content/u7q8068584113483/
Defeasibility in Judicial Opinion: Logical or Procedural?
David M. Godden and Douglas Walton, Informal Logic, 28, 2008, 6-19.
Presumption, Burden of Proof and Lack of Evidence
L'Analisi Linguistica e Letteraria, 16, 2008, 49-71 [uncorrected version posted].
The Argumentative Structure of Persuasive Definitions
Fabrizio Macagno and Douglas Walton, Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, 11, 2008, 525-549 [preprint posted]. Published version: http://www.springerlink.com/content/fk1jx3v4k382x2hx/
The Three Bases for the Enthymeme: A Dialogical Theory
Journal of Applied Logic, 6, 2008, 361-379 [uncorrected version posted].
Proleptic Argumentation
Argumentation & Advocacy, 44, 2008, 143-154 [uncorrected preprint posted].
Persuasive Definitions, Values, Meanings and Implicit Disagreements
Fabrizio Macagno and Douglas Walton, Informal Logic, 28, 2008, 203--228.
Can Argumentation Help AI to Understand Explanation?
Kunstliche Intelligenz, 22 (2), 2008, 8--12 .
The Speech Act of Clarification in a Dialogue Model
Studies in Communication Sciences, 7, 2007, 127-159 [preprint posted].
Informal Logic and the Dialectical Approach to Argument
Douglas Walton and David M. Godden, Reason Reclaimed, ed. H. V. Hansen and R. C. Pinto, Newport News, Virginia, Vale Press, 2007, 3-17.
Visualization Tools, Argumentation Schemes and Expert Opinion Evidence in Law
Law, Probability and Risk, 6, 2007, 119-140.
Types of Dialogue, Dialectical Relevance and Textual Congruity
Douglas Walton and Fabrizio Macagno, Anthropology & Philosophy: International Multidisciplinary Journal, 8, 2007, 101-119 [uncorrected preprint posted].
Advances in the Theory of Argumentation Schemes and Critical Questions
David M. Godden and Douglas Walton, Informal Logic, 27, 2007, 267-292 [preprint posted].
Metadialogues for Resolving Burden of Proof Disputes
Argumentation, 21, 2007, 291-316 [preprint posted].
Redefining Knowledge in a Way Suitable for Argumentation Theory
Douglas Walton and David M. Godden, Dissensus & the Search for Common Ground: Proceedings of OSSA June 2007, Windsor, CD-ROM, 2007, 1-13.
Argumentation Schemes in Dialogue
Chris Reed and Douglas Walton, Dissensus & the Search for Common Ground: Proceedings of OSSA, June 2007, Windsor, Ontario, CD-ROM, 2007, 1-11.
The Fallaciousness of Threats: Character and Ad Baculum
Douglas Walton and Fabrizio Macagno. Argumentation, 21, 2007, 63-81.
The Carneades Model of Argument and Burden of Proof
Thomas F. Gordon, Henry Prakken and Douglas Walton. Artificial Intelligence, 171, 2007, 875-896.
Identifying and Analyzing Arguments in a Text
Invited paper read at the Argumentation in (Con)Text Conference in Bergen, Norway, Jan. 4, 2007 [uncorrected preprint].
Dialogical Models of Explanation
Explanation-Aware Computing: Papers from the 2007 AAAI Workshop, Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence, Technical Report WS-07-06, Menlo Park California, AAAI Press, 2007, 1-9 [uncorrected version posted].
Argument Diagramming in Logic, Law and Artificial Intelligence
Chris Reed, Douglas Walton and Fabrizio Macagno, Knowledge Engineering Review, 22, 2007, 87-109 [uncorrected preprint]. Abstract: http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1294760
Evaluating Practical Reasoning
Synthese: An International Journal for Epistemology, Logic and Philosophy of Science, 157, 2007, 197-240.
Published version available at: http://www.springerlink.com/content/q9402gv46t415504/fulltext.pdf
A Theory of Presumption for Everyday Argumentation
David M. Godden and Douglas Walton. Pragmatics & Cognition, 15:2, 2007, 313-346. [uncorrected page-proofs posted.]
How to Make and Defend a Proposal in Deliberation Dialogue
Artificial Intelligence and Law, 14, 2006, 177-239. [Preprint posted.]
Available on the Springer Web Site: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10506-006-9025-x
Argument from Appearance: A New Argumentation Scheme
Logique et Analyse, 195, 2006, 319-340.
Examination Dialogue: An Argumentation Framework for Critically Questioning an Expert Opinion
Journal of Pragmatics, 38, 2006, 745-777.
Poisoning the Well
Argumentation, 20, 2006, 273-307.
Available on the Springer Web Site: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10503-006-9013-z
Argumentative Reasoning Patterns
Fabrizio Macagno and Douglas Walton, Proceedings of 6th CMNA (Computational Models of Natural Argument)Workshop, ECAI (European Conference on Artificial Intelligence), Rivadel Garda, Italy, August 28 - September 1, Trento, Italy, University of Trento, 2006, 48-51.
Rules for Reasoning from Knowledge and Lack of Knowledge
Douglas Walton,
Philosophia, 34, 2006, 355-376 . Preprint posted. Published version: http://www.springerlink.com/content/bn70155h45113377/
Common Knowledge in Argumentation
Douglas Walton and Fabrizio Macagno,
Studies in Communication Sciences, 6, 2006, 3-26 . [link to online version posted]
Arthur, George and the Mystery of the MissingMotive: Towards a Theory of Evidentiary Reasoning about Motives
Douglas Walton and Burkhard Schafer,
International Commentary on Evidence, 2006 Vol. 4, Issue 2, 1-47 . [link to online version posted]
Argument from Expert Opinion as Legal Evidence: Critical Questions and Admissibility Criteria of Expert Testimony in the American Legal System
David M. Godden and Douglas Walton, Ratio Juris, 19, 2006, 261-286.
Epistemic and
Dialectical Models of Begging the Question
Synthese: An International Journal for Epistemology, Logic and Philosophy of
Science, 152, 2006, 237-284.
Definitive version can be found at Springer
Link Synthese (subscription / proxy access required)
Using Conversation
Policies to Solve Problems of Ambiguity in Argumentation and Artificial Intelligence
Pragmatics and Cognition,14, 2006, 3-36 - Definitive version can be found
at IngentaConnect
Pragmatics & Cognition (subscription / proxy access required)
Evaluating
Corroborative Evidence
Douglas Walton and Chris Reed, Proceedings of the Conference of the International Society
for the Study of Argumentation (ISSA), Amsterdam, SicSat, 2006, 881-885.
Araucaria
as a Tool for Diagramming Arguments in Teaching and Studying Philosophy
Glenn Rowe, Fabrizio Macagno, Chris Reed and Douglas Walton, Teaching Philosophy, 29, 2006,
111-124.
Alternatives to Suspicion and Trust as Conditions for Challenge in Argumentative Dialogues
Douglas Walton and David M. Godden, Engaging Argument: Selected Papers from the 2005 NCA/AFA [Alta] Summer Conference on Argumentation, ed. Patricia Riley, Washington DC, National Communication Association, 2006, 438-444.
The
Carneades Argumentation Framework: Using Presumptions and Exceptions to Model
Critical Questions
Thomas F. Gordon and Douglas Walton, Computational Models of Argument: Proceedings of COMMA 2006,
ed. P. E. Dunne and T. J. M. Bench-Capon, Amsterdam, IOS Press, 2006, 195-207.
Pierson
v. Post Revisited
Thomas F. Gordon and Douglas Walton, Computational Models of Argument: Proceedings of COMMA 2006,
ed. P. E. Dunne and T. J. M. Bench-Capon, Amsterdam, IOS Press, 2006, 208-219.
The Impact of Argumentation on Artificial Intelligence
Douglas Walton and David M. Godden, in Considering Pragma-Dialectics, ed. Peter Houtlosser and Agnes van Rees, Mahwah, New Jersey, Erlbaum, 2006, 287-299. [uncorrected page proofs posted.]
Common
Knowledge in Legal Reasoning about Evidence
Douglas Walton and Fabrizio Macagno, International Commentary on Evidence, 3, 2005, 1-42.
Deceptive Arguments
Containing Persuasive Language and Persuasive Definitions
Argumentation, 19, 2005, 159-186.
Persuasion Dialogue in Online Dispute Resolution
Douglas Walton and David M. Godden, Artificial Intelligence and Law, 13, 2005, 273-295.
Practical Reasoning and Proposing: Tools for e-democracy
Legal Knowledge and Information Systems, ed. Marie-Francine Morens and Peter Spyns, Legal Knowledge and Information Systems, Amsterdam IOS Press, 2005, 113-114.
How to Evaluate Argumentation Using Schemes, Diagrams, Critical Questions and Dialogues
Studies in Communication Sciences, Argumentation in Dialogic Interaction, ed. Marcelo Dascal, Frans H. van Eemeren, Eddo Rigotti, Sorin Stati and Andrea Rocci, Special Issue, June 2005, 51-74.
Dialogues about the Burden of Proof
Henry Prakken, Chris Reed and Douglas Walton, Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, Held June 6-11, 2005 in Bologna, Italy, New York, The Association for Computing Machinery (ACM), 2005, 115-124.
What Role Can Rational Argument Play in ADR and Online Dispute Resolution?
Douglas Walton and Arno R. Lodder, IAAIL Workshop Series, Second International ODR Workshop, ed. John Zelzniknow and Arno R. Lodder, Nijmegen, Wolf Legal Publishers, 2005, 69-76.
Critical Questions in Computational Models of Legal Argument
Douglas Walton and Thomas F. Gordon, IAAIL Workshop Series, International Workshop on Argumentation in Artificial Intelligence and Law, ed. Paul E. Dunne and Trevor Bench-Capon, Nijmegen, Wolf Legal Publishers, 2005, 103-111.
Justification of Argumentation Schemes
The Australasian Journal of Logic, 3, 2005, 13 pages.
Argumentation Schemes and Enthymemes
Douglas Walton and Chris Reed, Synthese: An International Journal for Epistemology, Methodology and Philosophy of Science, 145, 2005, 339-370.
Begging the Question in Arguments Based on Testimony
Argumentation, 19, 2005, 85-113.
An Automated System for Argument Invention in Law Using Argumentation and Heuristic Search Procedures
Ratio Juris, 18, 2005, 434-463.
The Nature and Status of Critical Questions in Argumentation Schemes
Douglas Walton and David M. Godden, The Uses of Argument: Proceedings of a Conference
at McMaster University, 18-21 May 2005, ed. David Hitchcock, Hamilton, ON, OSSA,
2005 pp. 476-484.
Pragmatic
and Idealized Models of Knowledge and Ignorance
American Philosophical Quarterly, Vol.
42 No.1, 2005. pp. 59-69
Towards
a Formal and Implemented Model of Argumentation Schemes in Agent Communication
Chris Reed and Douglas Walton, Argumentation in
Multi-Agent Systems, ed. Iyad Rahwan, Pavlos Moraitis and Chris Reed, Berlin
and Heidelberg, Springer-Verlag, 2005. pp. 19-30
Denying the Antecedent as a Legitimate Argumentative Strategy: A Dialectical Model
David M. Godden and Douglas Walton, Informal Logic, 24, 2004, 219-243.
Classification of Fallacies of Relevance
Informal Logic, 24, 2004, 71-103.
A
New Dialectical Theory of Explanation
Philosophical Explorations, Vol. 7 No.1,
2004. pp. 71-89
Argumentation
Schemes and Burden of Proof
Henry Prakken, Chris Reed and Douglas Walton, Working
Notes of the 4th International Workshop on Computational Models of Natural Argument
(CMNA2004), ed. F. Grasso, C. Reed and G. Carenini, Valencia, 2004.
Argumentation
Schemes and Historical Origins of the Circumstantial Ad
Hominen
Argument
Argumentation, Vol. 18, 2004. pp.
359-368
Criteria
of Rationality for Evaluating Public Rhetoric
Talking Democracy: Historical Perspectives
on Rhetoric and Democracy, ed. Benedetto Fontana, Cary J. Nederman and Gary
Remer, University Park, Pennsylvania. State University Press, 2004. pp. 295-330 [preprint posted]
Is there
a Burden of Questioning?
Artificial Intelligence and Law, Vol. 11, 2003.
pp. 1-43.
The
Interrogation as a Type of Dialogue
Journal of Pragmatics, Vol. 35, 2003. pp. 1771-1802
Towards
a Formal Account of Reasoning About Evidence: Argumentation Schemes and Generalizations
Floris Bex, Henry Prakken, Chris Reed and Douglas Walton.
From: Artificial Intelligence and Law, Vol. 11, 2003. pp. 125-165
Argumentation
Schemes and Generalisations in Reasoning about Evidence
Henry Prakken, Chris Reed and Douglas Walton, Proceedings
of the 9th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law, Edinburgh,
2003. New York: ACM Press 2003. pp. 32-41
Argumentation Schemes
in Argument-as-Process and Argument-as-Product
Chris Reed and Douglas Walton, Proceedings of the Conference Celebrating Informal Logic @25,
Windsor, Ontario, 2003
Argumentation
Schemes: The Basis of Conditional Relevance
Michigan State Law Review, Vol. 2003(4),
2003. pp. 1205-1242
Defining
Conditional Relevance Using Linked Arguments and Argumentation Schemes: A Commentary
on Professor Callen's Article Rationality
and Relevancy: Conditional Relevancy and Constrained Resources
Michigan State Law Review, Vol. 2003(4),
2003. pp. 1305-1314
Diagramming,
Argumentation Schemes and Critical Questions
Chris Reed and Douglas Walton, Anyone Who Has a View: Theoretical
Contributions to the Study of Argumentation, ed. Frans H. van Eemeren, J. Anthony
Blair, Charles A. Willard and A. Francisca Snoek Henkemans, Dordrecht, Kluwer,
2003. pp. 195-211
Are Some Modus
Ponens Arguments Deductively Invalid?
Informal Logic, Vol. 22, 2002. pp. 19-46
Argumentation Schemes and Defeasible Inferences
Douglas Walton and Chris Reed, Workshop on Computational Models of Natural Argument, ed. Guiseppe Carenini, Floriana Grasso and Chris Reed, ECAI 2002, 15th European Conference on AI, 2002.
The Sunk Costs
Fallacy or Argument From Waste
Argumentation, Vol. 16, 2002. pp.
473-503
Abductive,
Presumptive and Plausible Arguments
Informal Logic, Vol. 21, 2001. pp. 141-169
Applications
of Argument Schemes
Douglas Walton and Chris Reed, Proceedings of the 4th Conference of the Ontario Society for the
Study of Argumentation (OSSA2001), ed. H. V. Hansen, C. W. Tindale, J. A. Blair, and R. H.
Johnson, 2001, Windsor, Canada, CD ROM
Enthymemes,
Common Knowlege, and Plausible Inference
Philosophy and Rhetoric, Vol. 34, 2001. pp. 93-112
Persuasive
Definitions and Public Policy Arguments
Argumentation and Advocacy, Vol. 37, 2001. pp. 117-132
Searching
for the Roots of the Circumstantial Ad Hominem
Argumentation, Vol. 15, 2001. pp. 207-221
Alfred Sidgwick:
A Little-Known Precursor of Informal Logic and Argumentation
Argumentation, Vol. 14, 2000. pp. 175-179
Argumentation
and Theory of Evidence
New Trends in Criminal Investigation and
Evidence, Vol. 2, 2000. pp. 711-732
Case Study of the
Use of a Circumstantial Ad Hominem in Political Argumentation
Philosophy and Rhetoric, Vol. 33, 2000. pp. 101-115
New Dialectical
Rules for Ambiguity
Informal Logic, Vol. 20, No. 3, 2000. pp. 261-274
The
Place of Dialogue Theory in Logic, Computer Science and Communication Studies
Synthese: an International Journal
for Epistemology, Logic and Philosophy of Science, Vol. 123, 2000. pp. 327-346
Applying Labelled
Deductive Systems and Multi-Agent Systems to Source-Based Argumentation
Journal of Logic and Computation, Vol. 9, 1999. pp. 63-80
The Appeal
to Ignorance, or Argumentum Ad Ignorantiam
Argumentation, Vol. 13, 1999. pp. 367-377
Dialectical
Relevance in Persuasion Dialogue
Informal Logic, Vol. 19, 1999. pp. 119-143
Ethotic Arguments and Fallacies : The Credibility Function
in Multi-Agent Dialogue Systems
Pragmatics and Cognition, Vol. 7, 1999.
pp. 177-203
The Fallacy
of Many Questions: On the Notions of Complexity, Loadedness and Unfair Entrapment
in Interrogative Theory
Argumentation, Vol. 13, 1999. pp. 379-383
Historical Origins
of Argumentum ad Consequentiam
Argumentation, Vol. 13, 1999. pp. 251-264
The
New Dialectic: A Method of Evaluating an Argument Used for Some Purpose in a
Given Case
ProtoSociology: An International
Journal of Interdisciplinary Research, Vol. 13, 1999. pp. 70-91
Profiles
of Dialogue for Evaluating Arguments from Ignorance
Argumentation, Vol. 13, 1999. pp. 53-71
Rethinking
the Fallacy of Hasty Generalization
Argumentation, Vol. 13, 1999. pp. 161-182
A Pragmatic
Model of Legal Disputation
Notre Dame Law Review, Vol. 73, 1998. pp. 711-735
Actions and
Inconsistency: the Closure Problem of Practical Reasoning
Contemporary Action Theory, ed. Ghita Holmstrom-Hintikka and
Raimo Tuomela, Vol. 1, Dordrecht, Kluwer, 1997, 159-175
How
Can Logic Best Be Applied to Arguments?
Logic Journal of the IGPL (Interest Group on Pure
and Applied Logic), vol. 5, 1997. pp. 603-614
Judging
How Heavily a Question is Loaded: A Pragmatic Method
Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines,
Vol. 17, 1997. pp. 53-71
What is Propaganda,
and What Exactly is Wrong With It?
Public Affairs Quarterly, Vol. 11, 1997. pp. 383-413
The Argument of
the Beard
Informal Logic, Vol. 18, 1996. pp. 235-259
Plausible
Deniability and Evasion of Burden of Proof
Argumentation, Vol. 10, 1996. pp. 47-58
Practical
Reasoning and the Structure of Fear Appeal Arguments
Philosophy and Rhetoric, Vol. 29, 1996. pp. 301-313
The Witch Hunt as a Structure of Argumentation
Argumentation,
Vol. 10, 1996, pp. 389-407
New Methods for Evaluating Arguments
Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines, Vol. 15, 1996. pp. 44-65
The Straw Man Fallacy
Logic and Argumentation, ed. Johan van Benthem, Frans H. van
Eemeren, Rob Grootendorst and Frank Veltman. Amsterdam, Royal Netherlands Academy
of Arts and Sciences, North-Holland, 1996. pp. 115-128
Appeal to Pity: A Case Study of the Argumentum ad Misericordiam
Argumentation, Vol. 9, 1995. pp. 769-784
Alethic, Epistemic,
and Dialectical Models of Argument
Philosophy and Rhetoric, Vol. 2, 1993. pp. 302-310
Commitment,
Types of Dialogue, and Fallacies
Informal Logic, Vol. 14, 1993. pp. 93-103
The
Speech Act of Presumption
Pragmatics and Cognition, Vol. 1, 1993. pp. 125-148
After Analytic
Philosophy, What's Next? An Analytic Philosopher's Perspective
The Journal of Speculative Philosophy, Vol. VI, 1992. pp.
123-142
Nonfallacious
Arguments from Ignorance
American Philosophical Quarterly, Vol. 29, 1992. pp. 381-387
Circular Reasoning
A Companion to Epistemology, ed. Jonathan Dancy and Ernest Sosa, Oxford, Blackwell, 1992, 66.
Questionable
Questions in Question Period: Prospects for an Informal Logic of Parliamentary
Discourse
Logic and Political Culture, ed. E.M. Barth and E.C.W. Krabbe,
Amsterdam, North-Holland, 1992, 87-95
Which of the Fallacies Are Fallacies of Relevance?
Argumentation, 6, 1992,237-250
Rules for
Plausible Reasoning
Informal Logic, Vol. 14, 1992. pp. 33-51
Types of Dialogue,
Dialectal Shifts and Fallacies
Argumentation Illuminated, ed. Frans H. van Eemeren et al.,
Amsterdam, SICSAT, 1992, 133-147
Bias, Critical
Doubt, and Fallacies
Argumentation and Advocacy, Vol. 28, 1991. pp. 1-22
Critical Faults
and Fallacies of Questioning
Journal of Pragmatics, Vol. 15, 1991. pp. 337-366
Hamblin on the
Standard Treatment of Fallacies
Philosophy and Rhetoric, Vol. 24, 1991. pp. 353-361
Ignoring Qualifications
(Secundum Quid) as a Subfallacy of Hasty Generalization
Logique & Analyse, Vol. 129-130, 1990.
pp. 113-154
What is Reasoning?
What is an Argument?
Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 87, 1990. pp. 399-419.
Reasoned Use
of Expertise in Argumentation
Argumentation, Vol. 3, 1989. pp. 59-73.
Dialogue Theory for Critical Thinking
Argumentation, Vol. 3, 1989. pp. 169-184.
Burden of Proof
Argumentation, Vol. 2, 1988. pp. 233-254.
The Ad Hominem Argument as an Informal Fallacy
Argumentation, Vol. 1, 1987, pp. 317-331
The Virtue of
Courage
The World and I, Vol. 12, 1987. pp. 595-609
Are Circular Arguments Necessarily Vicious?
American Philosophical Quarterly, Vol.22,
1985. pp. 263-274
New Directions in the Logic of Dialogue
Synthese, 63, 1985, 259-274.
Pragmatic Inferences About Actions
Synthese, Vol.65, 1985. pp. 211-233
Games, Graphs
and Circular Arguments
Douglas Walton and Lynn M. Batten, Logique et Analyse, 106, 1984. pp. 133-164
Enthymemes
Logique et Analyse, 103-104, 1983, 395-410.
The Ethical
Force of Definitions
Journal of Medical Ethics, Vol. 6, 1980. pp. 16-18
Omitting, Refraining,
and Letting Happen
American Philosophical Quarterly, Vol. 17, 1980.
pp. 319-326
On the Logical
Form of Some Commonplace Action Expressions
Grazer Philosophische Studien, Vol. 10, 1980. pp. 141-148
Petitio Principii
and Argument Analysis
Informal Logic: The First International Symposium, ed. J.
Anthony Blair and Ralph H. Johnson, Inverness, California, Edgepress, 1980,
41-54
Why is the Ad
Populum a Fallacy?
Philosophy and Rhetoric, Vol. 13, 1980. pp. 264-278
Logical
Form and Agency
Philosophical Studies, Vol. 29, 1976. pp. 75-89
A Note on Motives,
Consequences, and Value
The Journal of Value Inquiry, Vol. X, 1976.
pp. 149-150
St. Anselm and
the Logical Syntax of Agency
Franciscan Studies, Vol. 36, 1976. pp. 298-312
Philosophical
Perspectives on the Insanity Defense
The Human Context, Vol. 7, 1975. pp. 546-560