Emotion as permeative: Attempting to model the unidentifiable

The question of emotion in argumentation has received considerable attention in recent years. But there is a tension between the traditional normative role of informal logic, and the inclusion of emotion which is viewed as notoriously unstable. Here I argue that that, a] there is always emotion in an argument; b] that the presence of emotion is a good thing; and c] that we can and ought model and teach the use of emotion in Argumentation Theory

DialogueRNN: An Attentive RNN for Emotion Detection in Conversations

Emotion detection in conversations is a necessary step for a number of applications, including opinion mining over chat history, social media threads, debates, argumentation mining, understanding consumer feedback in live conversations, etc. Currently, systems do not treat the parties in the conversation individually by adapting to the speaker of each utterance. In this paper, we describe a new method based on recurrent neural networks that keeps track of the individual party states throughout the conversation and uses this information for emotion classification. Our model outperforms the state of the art by a significant margin on two different datasets.Comment: AAAI 201

The Epistemology of Anger in Argumentation

While anger can derail argumentation, it can also help arguers and audiences to reason together in argumentation. Anger can provide information about premises, biases, goals, discussants, and depth of disagreement that people might otherwise fail to recognize or prematurely dismiss. Anger can also enhance the salience of certain premises and underscore the importance of related inferences. For these reasons, we claim that anger can serve as an epistemic resource in argumentation

Zur Relation zwischen Argumentation und Emotion : eine Studie anhand journalistischer Blogs aus Deutschland und Spanien

Die aristotelische Trias der Überzeugungsmittel Logos, Ethos und Pathos ist ein wesentlicher Ausgangspunkt zahlreicher linguistischer Untersuchungen in den Bereichen Argumentation und Emotion. Trotz der bereits von Aristoteles postulierten Einheit dieser Überzeugungsmittel finden sich überwiegend Forschungsarbeiten, in denen Argumentation (Logos) und Emotion (Ethos und Pathos) isoliert voneinander betrachtet werden, sodass eine systematische Beschreibung des Zusammenhangs von Argumentation und Emotion bzw. die Beantwortung der Frage nach ihrer Relation bisher noch weitgehend aussteht. Ebendiesem Desiderat möchte die vorliegende Arbeit begegnen. In concreto wird die Relation zwischen argumentativen Makrostrukturen (koordinierte Argumentation, Gegenargumentation, konzessive Argumentation sowie Signale der argumentativen Verstärkung und Abschwächung) und den verschiedenen Arten sprachlicher Emotionsmanifestation (Emotionsausdruck, Emotionszuschreibung und Emotionskonstruktion) unter Berücksichtigung der jeweiligen Ethos- und Pathosrelevanz der Emotionsart analysiert. Als Untersuchungskorpus dienen journalistische Blogs aus Deutschland und Spanien zum Thema Wirtschaftskrise – eine argumentative Textsorte mit einer hohen emotionalen Relevanz. So liefert die vorliegende Studie eine erste umfassende Beschreibung der vielfältigen Relationen zwischen Argumentation und Emotion und möchte darüber hinaus Anstoß zur weiteren Erforschung dieses komplexen Gebiets geben

Beyond Argument

Accounts of deep disagreements can generally be categorized as optimistic or pessimistic. Pessimistic interpretations insist that the depth of deep disagreements precludes the possibility of rational resolution altogether, while optimistic variations maintain the contrary. Despite both approaches’ respective positions, they nevertheless often, either explicitly or implicitly, agree on the underlying assumption that argumentation offers the only possible rational resolution to deep disagreements. This paper challenges that idea by, first, diagnosing this argument-only model of arriving at rational resolutions, second, articulating a competing but undertheorized Hegelian-informed approach, and third, attending briefly to some of the challenges of such an approach

Emotions, Music, and Logos

The article introduces a cognitive and componential view of religious emotions. General emotions are claimed to consist of at least two compounds, the cognitive compound and the affective compound. Religious emotions are typically general emotions which are characterized by three specific conditions: they involve a thought of God or godlike, they are significant for a person feeling them and their meaning is derived from religious practices. The article discusses the notion of spiritual emotions in Ancient theology and compares the idea of it with emotions in music. By referring to the notion of mental language, it is argued that some religious emotions are like emotions in music and as such they can be interpreted as tones of Logos

Emotional Arguments: Ancient And Contemporary Views

The prodigious development of argumentation theory over the last three decades has raised many issues that challenge some of the long held assumptions that characterize the traditional study of argument. One of these issues is the role of emotion in argument and argument analysis. While rhetoric has, with its emphasis on persuasion, always recognized that emotions play some role determining which arguments we accept and reject, a long tradition sees appeals to emotion as fallacies that violate the standards of rationality and objectivity reason and argument require