Janee Diamond Un Official Fan Site Tribute

Janee Diamond : This Is An Un Official Fan Site Tribute
Janee Diamond
Porn Queen Actress Superstar

Argumentation theory, or argumentation, is the interdisciplinary study of how conclusions can be reached through logical reasoning; that is, claims based, soundly or not, on premises. It includes the arts and sciences of civil debate, dialogue, conversation, and persuasion. It studies rules of inference, logic, and procedural rules in both artificial and real world settings.[1] Argumentation includes deliberation and negotiation which are concerned with collaborative decision-making procedures.[2] It also encompasses eristic dialog, the branch of social debate in which victory over an opponent is the primary goal, and didactic dialogue used for teaching.[3] This art and science is often the means by which people protect their beliefs or self-interests—or choose to change them—in rational dialogue, in common parlance, and during the process of arguing.
Argumentation is used in law, for example in trials, in preparing an argument to be presented to a court, and in testing the validity of certain kinds of evidence. Also, argumentation scholars study the post hoc rationalizations by which organizational actors try to justify decisions they have made irrationally. Argumentation is one of four rhetorical modes (also known as modes of discourse), along with exposition, description, and narration. Contents 1 Key components of argumentation 2 Internal structure of arguments 3 Types of dialogue 4 Argumentation and the grounds of knowledge 5 Approaches to argumentation in communication and informal logic 6 Kinds of argumentation 6.1 Conversational argumentation 6.2 Mathematical argumentation 6.3 Scientific argumentation 6.4 Interpretive argumentation 6.5 Legal argumentation 6.6 Political argumentation 7 Psychological aspects 8 Theories 8.1 Argument fields 8.2 Stephen E. Toulmin's contributions 8.2.1 An alternative to absolutism and relativism 8.2.2 Toulmin model of argument 8.2.3 The evolution of knowledge 8.3 Pragma-dialectics 8.4 Walton's logical argumentation method 9 Artificial intelligence 10 See also 11 References 12 Further reading 12.1 Flagship journals

Key components of argumentation Understanding and identifying arguments, either explicit or implied, and the goals of the participants in the different types of dialogue. Identifying the premises from which conclusions are derived Establishing the "burden of proof" – determining who made the initial claim and is thus responsible for providing evidence why his/her position merits acceptance. For the one carrying the "burden of proof", the advocate, to marshal evidence for his/her position in order to convince or force the opponent's acceptance. The method by which this is accomplished is producing valid, sound, and cogent arguments, devoid of weaknesses, and not easily attacked. In a debate, fulfillment of the burden of proof creates a burden of rejoinder. One must try to identify faulty reasoning in the opponent's argument, to attack the reasons/premises of the argument, to provide counterexamples if possible, to identify any fallacies, and to show why a valid conclusion cannot be derived from the reasons provided for his/her argument. For example, consider the following exchange, illustrated by the No true Scotsman fallacy: Argument: "No Scotsman puts sugar on his porridge." Reply: "But my friend Angus likes sugar with his porridge." Rebuttal: "Ah yes, but no true Scotsman puts sugar on his porridge." In this dialogue, the proposer first offers a premise, the premise is challenged by the interlocutor, and finally the proposer offers a modification of the premise. This exchange could be part of a larger discussion, for example a murder trial, in which the defendant is a Scotsman, and it had been established earlier that the murderer was eating sugared porridge when he or she committed the murder. Internal structure of arguments Typically an argument has an internal structure, comprising the following a set of assumptions or premises a method of reasoning or deduction and a conclusion or point. An argument has one or more premises and one conclusion. Often classical logic is used as the method of reasoning so that the conclusion follows logically from the assumptions or support. One challenge is that if the set of assumptions is inconsistent then anything can follow logically from inconsistency. Therefore, it is common to insist that the set of assumptions be consistent. It is also good practice to require the set of assumptions to be the minimal set, with respect to set inclusion, necessary to infer the consequent. Such arguments are called MINCON arguments, short for minimal consistent. Such argumentation has been applied to the fields of law and medicine. A non-classical approach to argumentation investigates abstract arguments, where 'argument' is considered a primitive term, so no internal structure of arguments is taken on account. Types of dialogue In its most common form, argumentation involves an individual and an interlocutor or opponent engaged in dialogue, each contending differing positions and trying to persuade each other, but there are various types of dialogue:[4] Persuasion dialogue aims to resolve conflicting points of view of different positions. Negotiation aims to resolve conflicts of interests by cooperation and dealmaking. Inquiry aims to resolve general ignorance by the growth of knowledge. Deliberation aims to resolve a need to take action by reaching a decision. Information seeking aims to reduce one party's ignorance by requesting information from another party that is in a position to know something. Eristics aims to resolve a situation of antagonism through verbal fighting. Argumentation and the grounds of knowledge Argumentation theory had its origins in foundationalism, a theory of knowledge (epistemology) in the field of philosophy. It sought to find the grounds for claims in the forms (logic) and materials (factual laws) of a universal system of knowledge. The dialectical method was made famous by Plato and his use of Socrates critically questioning various characters and historical figures. But argument scholars gradually rejected Aristotle's systematic philosophy and the idealism in Plato and Kant. They questioned and ultimately discarded the idea that argument premises take their soundness from formal philosophical systems. The field thus broadened.[5] One of the original contributors to this trend was the philosopher Chaim Perelman, who together with Lucie Olbrechts-Tyteca introduced the French term la nouvelle rhetorique in 1958 to describe an approach to argument which is not reduced to application of formal rules of inference. Perelman's view of argumentation is much closer to a juridical one, in which rules for presenting evidence and rebuttals play an important role. Karl R. Wallace's seminal essay, "The Substance of Rhetoric: Good Reasons" in the Quarterly Journal of Speech (1963) 44, led many scholars to study "marketplace argumentation" – the ordinary arguments of ordinary people. The seminal essay on marketplace argumentation is Ray Lynn Anderson and C. David Mortensen's "Logic and Marketplace Argumentation" Quarterly Journal of Speech 53 (1967): 143–150.[6][7] This line of thinking led to a natural alliance with late developments in the sociology of knowledge.[8] Some scholars drew connections with recent developments in philosophy, namely the pragmatism of John Dewey and Richard Rorty. Rorty has called this shift in emphasis "the linguistic turn". In this new hybrid approach argumentation is used with or without empirical evidence to establish convincing conclusions about issues which are moral, scientific, epistemic, or of a nature in which science alone cannot answer. Out of pragmatism and many intellectual developments in the humanities and social sciences, "non-philosophical" argumentation theories grew which located the formal and material grounds of arguments in particular intellectual fields. These theories include informal logic, social epistemology, ethnomethodology, speech acts, the sociology of knowledge, the sociology of science, and social psychology. These new theories are not non-logical or anti-logical. They find logical coherence in most communities of discourse. These theories are thus often labeled "sociological" in that they focus on the social grounds of knowledge

nude bikini pics clinton photos chelsea pictures desnuda fotos naked laura porn free porno fan and linda video site lisa kelly playboy topless lolo joan xxx official sex traci ferrari lords eva photo the nue tube pic videos sexy smith ana leah welch lovelace you remini club loren giacomo karen elizabeth carangi fake julia trinity ava kate fenech dana pozzi images gallery edwige moana victoria kristel joanna pornstar foto sylvia rachel pamela principal clips movies lauren shania valerie fabian collins nia rio del robin rhodes hart jane stevens measurements susan taylor jenny sanchez moore lane antonelli lancaume nancy roselyn emily hartley boobs brooke angie kim web demi bonet carrie allen grant hot esther deborah with braga jones fansite yates freeones
lee heather tina inger severance christina louise lopez gina wallpaper nacked ann film nackt fisher carey corinne shue ass vancamp clery model shannon elisabeth panties biografia angelina sofia erin monroe dazza charlene janet doris vanessa anna belinda reguera diane paula fucking scene peeples sonia shauna autopsy monica sharon patricia alicia plato bardot
melissa movie picture cynthia nicole maria star nina julie mary gemser naomi williams torrent nuda barbara twain anderson gia nudes fakes larue pussy actress upskirt san raquel jennifer tits mariah meg sandra big michelle roberts marie lumley tewes clip salma vergara jada cristal day shields cassidy sandrelli penthouse dickinson goldie nud angel brigitte drew fucked amanda shemale olivia website milano ellen ellison vidcaps hayek stone download carmen bessie swimsuit vera zeta locklear shirley anal gray cindy marilyn connie kayla sucking streep cock jensen john tiffani stockings hawn for weaver rue barrymore catherine bellucci rebecca bondage feet applegate jolie sigourney wilkinson nipples juliet revealing teresa magazine kennedy ashley what bio biography agutter wood her jordan hill com jessica pornos blowjob
lesbian nued grace hardcore regera palmer asia theresa leeuw heaton juhi alyssa pinkett rene actriz black vicky jamie ryan gillian massey short shirtless scenes maggie dreyfus lynne mpegs melua george thiessen jean june crawford alex natalie bullock playmate berry andrews maren kleevage quennessen pix hair shelley tiffany gunn galleries from russo dhue lebrock leigh fuck stefania tilton laurie russell vids bessie swimsuit vera zeta shirley locklear anal gray cindy marilyn connie kayla sucking streep cock jensen john tiffani stockings hawn for weaver rue catherine barrymore bellucci rebecca bondage feet applegate jolie george thiessen jean june crawford alex sigourney wilkinson nipples juliet revealing teresa magazine kennedy ashley what bio biography agutter jordan wood her hill com jessica pornos blowjob lesbian nued grace
hardcore regera palmer asia theresa leeuw heaton juhi alyssa pinkett rene actriz black vicky rutherford lohan winslet spungen shawnee swanson newton hannah leslie silverstone did frann wallpapers kidman louis kristy valeria lang fiorentino deanna rita hillary katie granny girls megan tori paris arquette amber sue escort chawla dorothy jessie anthony courtney shot sites kay meryl judy candice desnudo wallace gertz show teen savannah busty schneider glass thong spears young erika aniston stiles capshaw loni imagenes von myspace jena daryl girl hotmail nicola savoy
garr bonnie sexe play adriana donna angelique love actor mitchell unger sellecca adult hairstyles malone teri hayworth lynn harry kara rodriguez films welles peliculas kaprisky uschi blakely halle lindsay miranda jami jamie ryan gillian massey short scenes shirtless maggie dreyfus lynne mpegs melua natalie bullock playmate berry andrews maren kleevage quennessen pix hair shelley tiffany gunn