Citation Context

...s The problem of having to choose between the two hypotheses led to the following insight that became a founding feature of the Carneades Argumentation System: which hypothesis should be applied in any given case depends on the argumentation scheme (Walton and Gordon, 2005). In other words, the solution proposed was that a different hypothesis should be applied to each critical question of the scheme. This solution allows the burden of proof for answering critical questions to be assigned to either the proponent or the respondent, on a question by question basis for each argumentation scheme (Walton and Gordon, 2011). The solution was essentially to model critical questions as premises of a scheme by expanding the premises in the scheme. The ordinary premises are the minor and major premises of the schemes. The assumptions represent critical questions to be answered by the proponent. The exceptions represent critical questions to be answered by the respondent. The two latter types of 14 critical questions are modeled as additional premises. On this view whether a premise holds depends not only on its type but also the dialectical status of the premise during a sequence of dialogue. Shifts of burden take p...