Knowledge Cartography: Software tools and mapping techniques

Knowledge Cartography is the discipline of mapping intellectual landscapes.The focus of this book is on the process by which manually crafting interactive, hypertextual maps clarifies one’s own understanding, as well as communicating it.The authors see mapping software as a set of visual tools for reading and writing in a networked age. In an information ocean, the primary challenge is to find meaningful patterns around which we can weave plausible narratives. Maps of concepts, discussions and arguments make the connections between ideas tangible and disputable. With 17 chapters from the leading researchers and practitioners, the reader will find the current state–of-the-art in the field. Part 1 focuses on educational applications in schools and universities, before Part 2 turns to applications in professional communitie

Artificial intelligence and justice: applicability of technology in judicial decisions in Argentina

Las sociedades actuales producen y se enfrentan a vertiginosos cambios en los espacios sobre los cuales se despliega. Parte de esta celeridad y amplitud, puede adjudicarse a la injerencia y emerger de la tecnología. Ciencia, tecnología y sociedad estarán en constante intercambio e intentarán mantener balanceados los niveles de comunicación entre ellos. El ritmo, la trascendencia y crecimiento alcanzados por los espacios tecnológicos se hacen cada vez más visibles en los últimos tiempos. En ese diálogo, la sociedad adquiere mayor conciencia de los cambios que entraña la introducción de las técnicas informáticas en los diferentes órdenes de la cultura. Los saberes receptan y hacen uso de los nuevos avances. Se preguntan, intercambian pareceres e intentan asimilar aquellos aspectos que le permiten mejorar y transformar los estudios de sus áreas específicas de trabajo. En este orden de ideas, el derecho no será un espacio ajeno. Desconfianza, seguridad, transparencia, control, modernización, sistematización, incredulidad, son algunas de las expresiones que emergen al proponer la conexión del derecho con la tecnología en sus diferentes formas.Current societies produce and face vertiginous changes in the spaces on which it unfolds. Part of this speed and breadth can be attributed to interference and the emergence of technology. Science, technology and society will be in constant exchange and will try to maintain a balanced level of communication between them. The pace, significance and growth achieved by technological spaces have become increasingly visible in recent times. In this dialogue, society becomes more aware of the changes involved in the introduction of computer techniques in the different orders of culture. Knowledge receives and makes use of new advances. They ask questions, exchange opinions and try to assimilate those aspects that allow them to improve and transform the studies of their specific areas of work. In this order of ideas, the law will not be a foreign space. Mistrust, security, transparency, control, modernization, systematization, disbelief, are some of the expressions that emerge when proposing the connection of law with technology in its different forms.Fil: Ana Dobratinich, Héctor Gonzalo. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Derecho; Argentin

Cohere: Towards Web 2.0 Argumentation

Students, researchers and professional analysts lack effective tools to make personal and collective sense of problems while working in distributed teams. Central to this work is the process of sharing–and contesting–interpretations via different forms of argument. How does the 'Web 2.0' paradigm challenge us to deliver useful, usable tools for online argumentation? This paper reviews the current state of the art in Web Argumentation, describes key features of the Web 2.0 orientation, and identifies some of the tensions that must be negotiated in bringing these worlds together. It then describes how these design principles are interpreted in Cohere, a web tool for social bookmarking, idea-linking, and argument visualization

Software agents in support of human argument mapping

This paper reports progress in realizing human-agent argumentation, which we argue will be part of future Computer-Supported Collaborative Argumentation (CSCA) tools. With a particular interest in argument mapping, we present two investigations demonstrating how a particular agent-oriented language and architecture can augment CSCA: (i) the use of the IBIS formalism enabling Brahms agents to simulate argumentation, and (ii) the extension of the Compendium tool by integrating it with Brahms agents tasked with detecting related discourse elsewhere

Reflective Argumentation

Theories of argumentation usually focus on arguments as means of persuasion, finding consensus, or justifying knowledge claims. However, the construction and visualization of arguments can also be used to clarify one's own thinking and to stimulate change of this thinking if gaps, unjustified assumptions, contradictions, or open questions can be identified. This is what I call "reflective argumentation." The objective of this paper is, first, to clarify the conditions of reflective argumentation and, second, to discuss the possibilities of argument visualization methods in supporting reflection and cognitive change. After a discussion of the cognitive problems we are facing in conflicts--obviously the area where cognitive change is hardest--the second part will, based on this, determine a set of requirements argument visualization tools should fulfill if their main purpose is stimulating reflection and cognitive change. In the third part, I will evaluate available argument visualization methods with regard to these requirements and talk about their limitations. The fourth part, then, introduces a new method of argument visualization which I call Logical Argument Mapping (LAM). LAM has specifically been designed to support reflective argumentation. Since it uses primarily deductively valid argument schemes, this design decision has to be justified with regard to goals of reflective argumentation. The fifth part, finally, provides an example of how Logical Argument Mapping could be used as a method of reflective argumentation in a political controversy

Uso de software para la representación de argumentos en lógica informal

Este trabajo está dividido en tres partes. En la primera parte, presentamos brevemente el panorama de la diagramación de argumentos expresados en lenguaje natural dentro del ámbito de la lógica informal. Señalamos el impacto sufrido por la diagramación en lógica informal a partir de la incorporación de tecnologías y mostramos el interés pedagógico de la diagramación en la práctica de enseñanza-aprendizaje de la lógica informal. En la segunda parte, presentamos la reconstrucción de la metodología de trabajo empleada en la investigación que comprende un análisis exploratorio de las características y utilidades de un software específico de diagramación de argumentos y la consideración en su uso efectivo en un contexto de aprendizaje de Lógica en un curso de grado del año 2012 en la Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Finalizando el trabajo presentaremos la grilla de análisis empleada y discutiremos brevemente algunos de los ejes sobre los que dicho análisis puede ser llevado a cabo en futuras investigaciones.Fil: Letzen, Diego Andrés. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Filosofía y Humanidades. Escuela de Filosofía; Argentina.Fil: Massolo, Alba. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Filosofía y Humanidades. Escuela de Filosofía; Argentina.Fil: Ferrero, Federico. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Filosofía y Humanidades. Escuela de Ciencias de la Educación; Argentina.Filosofía, Historia y Filosofía de la Ciencia y la Tecnologí

Diagramación de argumentos: el argumento de la depredación

Un sistema de diagramación de argumentos claro y preciso debe reflejar adecuadamente las distinciones de los hablantes sobre la estructura de las argumentaciones. Argumentar es presentar algo a alguien como una razón para otra cosa; esto es, hacer manifiesto o poner algo en la presencia de alguien como una razón para otra cosa. Para lograrlo el argumentador puede usar distintos recursos convencionales, entre los que figuran los conectores argumentativos. Los conectores argumentativos son partículas o expresiones que estructuran un texto estableciendo relaciones argumentativas entre dos o más enunciados. Mi tesis es que una técnica de diagramación satisfactoria debe captar y permitir representar las relaciones expresadas en la lengua por los conectores argumentativos. Para ilustrarlo diagramaré la argumentación de C.K. Fink en “El argumento de la depredación”A clear and accurate system of argument diagramming must give a suitable representation of the distinctions made among different argument structures in ordinary language. To argue is to present to someone something as a reason for another thing; i.e. to exhibit, offer for examination or lay before someone’s cognizance something as a reason for another thing. To achieve this the arguer uses different conventional tools, including argumentative connectors. These are words or expressions that structure a text, establishing argumentative relations between two or more statements. My thesis is that a satisfactory technique of argument diagramming has to apprehend and picture the relations signified by argumentative connectors. As an illustration I will diagram the predation argument as analyzed by C.K. Fink in “The Predation Argument