Character evidence : an abductive theory
Author(s)
Bibliographic Information
Character evidence : an abductive theory
（Argumentation library / series editors, Frans H. van Eemeren ... [et al.], v. 11）
Springer, c2006
- : (HB)
Available at / 4 libraries
-
No Libraries matched.
- Remove all filters.
Note
Bibliography: p. 221-229
Includes index
Description and Table of Contents
Description
This book examines the nature of evidence for character judgments, using a model of abductive reasoning called Inference To The Best Explanation. The book expands this notion based on recent work with models of reasoning using argumentation theory and artificial intelligence. The aim is not just to show how character judgments are made, but how they should be properly be made based on sound reasoning, avoiding common errors and superficial judgments.
Table of Contents
Acknowledgments. 1. The Problem of Character Evidence. 1.1. Individual Worth and Respect for Character. 1.2. Ruling on Relevance of Character Evidence in Trials. 1.3. Problem of the Two-sided Nature of Character Evidence in Law. 1.4. Innuendo and Attacks on Character. 1.5. Character Assassination and Panegyric Discourse. 1.6. Reputation and Character. 1.7. Character Attacks and Ad Hominem Arguments. 1.8. A Problem of Reasoning and Evidence. 1.9. Character Properties in Law and Ethics. 1.10. Character Evidence in Law and Artificial Intelligence. 2. Defining and Judging Character. 2.1. Bias and Character. 2.2. Habit, Propensity and Motive. 2.3. Agents, Practical Reasoning and Character. 2.4. Character as the Property of an Agent. 2.5. Evaluating Witness Testimony. 2.6. The Structure of Abductive Reasoning. 2.7. Character as an Interpersonal Notion. 2.8. Evidence for Character Judgments. 2.9. Drawing Conclusions by Abductive Reasoning from Data. 2.10. Differentiating Character, Motive and Bias. 3. Integrity and Hypocrisy. 3.1. The Three Central Characteristics of Integrity. 3.2. Judging a Person's Integrity. 3.3. Commitment and Integrity. 3.4. A Case Where a Person's Integrity is in Doubt. 3.5. Living Up to a Commitment. 3.6. Integrity and Living Up to a Commitment . 3.7. Character Attack Based on Alleged Hypocrisy. 3.8. Evaluation of the Alleged Hypocrisy Case. 3.9. Evidence for Judgments of Integrity and Hypocrisy.3.10. The Defeasibility of Character Judgments. 4. Simulative Reasoning and Plan Recognition. 4.1. Collingwood's Theory of Reenactment. 4.2. Simulative and Autoepistemic Reasoning. 4.3. Strategic Use of Simulative Reasoning. 4.4. Scripts and Stories. 4.5. Simulative Practical Reasoning. 4.6. Plan Recognition. 4.7. Characteristics of Simulative Practical Reasoning. 4.8. Combination of Simulative and Abductive Reasoning. 4.9. Abstraction and Chaining. 4.10. Defeasible Reasoning. 5. Multi-Agent Dialogue. 5.1. Plausible Reasoning. 5.2. Plan Recognition and Dialogue. 5.3. Sources of Dialogue Evidence. 5.4. Commitment in Dialogue. 5.5. Legal Evidence and Examination Dialogue. 5.6. Examination Dialogue and Conversational Postulates. 5.7. A Dialectical Theory of Explanation. 5.8. A Dialectical Argumentation Scheme for Abduction. 5.9. Abductive Evidence for Courage Judgments. 5.10. Abductive Evidence for Integrity Judgments. 6. A Multi-Agent System for Character Evidence. 6.1. Character-Based Inferences. 6.2. Inferences Linking Evidence to Character. 6.3. Generalizations and Fallacies. 6.4. Character-Based Evidence Contrasted to Other Evidence. 6.5. Argumentation Schemes. 6.6. Ad Hominem Arguments. 6.7. Plan Recognition and Practical Inconsistency. 6.8. Simulative Reasoning in Ad Hominem Arguments. 6.9. The PFARD Multi-Agent Dialogue System. 6.10. Summary of the Method. Bibliography.
by "Nielsen BookData"
