Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]

Skip to main content
Log in

Christopher W. Tindale, Acts of Arguing, A Rhetorical Model of Argument

  • Published:
Artificial Intelligence and Law Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.

References

  • Lodder, A. R. (1999). DiaLaw-On Legal Justification and Dialogical Models of Argumentation (Law and Philosophy Library 42). Dordrecht/Boston/London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pinto, R. C. (1994). Logic, Epistemology and Argument Appraisal. In Johnson, R. H. and Blair, J. A. (eds.), News Essays in Informal Logic. Windsor: Informal Logic, pp. 118-124.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vorobej, M. (1992). 'Defining Deduction', Informal Logic 14, 105-118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wenzel, J. W. (1989). 'Relevance and Other Norms of Argument: A Rhetorical Exploration'. In Maier, R. (ed.), Norms in Argumentation. Dordrecht: Foris Publications.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lodder, A.R. Christopher W. Tindale, Acts of Arguing, A Rhetorical Model of Argument. Artificial Intelligence and Law 9, 73–78 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011264731135

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011264731135

Navigation