[ExI] Argument mapping

[Bryan Bishop]

On Saturday 17 May 2008, Kevin H wrote:
> I don't know how related this is to transhumanism, but I wanted to
> procure opinions about argument mapping on the internet

I think you may be interested in:
http://heybryan.org/docs/cheat_sheet_writing.pdf

It's a document that lists fallacious argumentation structures. I 
developed this document a few years ago when I was becoming fed up with 
the silly arguments I was seeing in papers for the literature arts 
classes in the high school. And since I couldn't bring myself to use 
fallacious reasoning without knowing how to be cleverly fallacious, I 
did a broad overview of most of the ways to do fallacious reasoning. 
That's the result of it. It doesn't go over constructive arguments, but 
I am sure that you can come up with a taxonomy for those too, i.e. 
certain ways of leading and guiding arguments, much like the basic 
logical propositions. There's also a mathematics database out there on 
the internet that starts with the 11 axioms of mathematics (ZRG axiom 
theory?) and starts from well-formed proofs and moves all the way up to 
2+2=4, as a proof. This same logic style can probably be used in 
argumentation, but the trick is finding the mapping between what you're 
talking about and the structures within the database, the structures 
are the patterns - like the recursive Koch snowflakes that go over the 
same proofs over and over again on slightly permutated proofs/theorems.

Don't know where it is anymore.

- Bryan
________________________________________
http://heybryan.org/