On resolving conflicts between arguments

Argument systems are based on the idea that one can construct arguments for propositions; i.e., structured reasons justifying the belief in a proposition. Using defeasible rules, arguments need not be valid in all circumstances, therefore, it might be possible to construct an argument for a proposition as well as its negation. When arguments support conflicting propositions, one of the arguments must be defeated, which raises the question of \emph{which (sub-)arguments can be subject to defeat}? In legal argumentation, meta-rules determine the valid arguments by considering the last defeasible rule of each argument involved in a conflict. Since it is easier to evaluate arguments using their last rules, \emph{can a conflict be resolved by considering only the last defeasible rules of the arguments involved}? We propose a new argument system where, instead of deriving a defeat relation between arguments, \emph{undercutting-arguments} for the defeat of defeasible rules are constructed. This system allows us, (\textit{i}) to resolve conflicts (a generalization of rebutting arguments) using only the last rules of the arguments for inconsistencies, (\textit{ii}) to determine a set of valid (undefeated) arguments in linear time using an algorithm based on a JTMS, (\textit{iii}) to establish a relation with Default Logic, and (\textit{iv}) to prove closure properties such as \emph{cumulativity}. We also propose an extension of the argument system that enables \emph{reasoning by cases}

The Impact of Computer Mediation on Group and Individual Preferences in Social Dilemmas

As sensitivity to social issues increases, corporations face a particularIy difficult challenge when confronted with trade-oEs between corporate self-interest and the public interest. The difficulty OE resolving sese socid d i l e m a s in groups is amplified by value conflicts across group members and also b y conflicts bciween an individual\u27s p e r s o d values and those of the corporation. This study investigates the impact of group suppol-\u27,s y s t e ~ (sGSS) on persuasive processes md fiecison outcomes associated with social dilerrunas. The theoretical foundafronfor the study is the literature on group gol&zation, in particular the theories of persuasive arguments and social comparison (Isen\u27ksg 1986)

Friends of the Earth International: negotiating a transnational identity

The aim of this article is to assess the relationships between majority (South) and minority (North) world environmental groups by focusing on one of the largest transnational environmental organisations: Friends of the Earth International (FoEI):1 1. For this article I am drawing on data gathered at the FoEI biennial meeting in Croatia in September 2004 and documents provided by FoE Australia on their work in FoEI. View all notes a federation of autonomous groups from 71 countries (see Appendix). FoEI's federal structure gives more power to southern groups than other transnational environmental organisations and FoEI has taken a relatively radical line on issues of global justice. Nevertheless, there have been arguments over strategy and ideology between northern and southern groups. The article examines how FoEI responded to a crisis in its identity over North–South differences in 2002–4. The trust developed through regular international meetings and a distinctive organisational culture allowed the network to rebuild its solidarity, although without ever fully resolving differences of ideology. It is argued that FoEI will be best able to maintain its North–South representation if it accepts that internal conflicts and debates over core ideological questions are normal for social movements

Arguing and negotiating in the presence of social influences

Postprin

DISPUTES RESOLUTION AMONGST RESIDENTS OF TENEMENT PROPERTIES IN LAGOS, NIGERIA

Low income earners in Lagos metropolis have peculiar taste for a type of residential property, popularly referred to as face-me-I-face-you. The type of property usually consists of many units rooms flanking a central passage. Tenants with different orientation and background cohabit, and conflicts frequently occur amongst them. This paper examines the causes of conflicts that are common amongst tenants of tenement type of residential accommodation in Lagos metropolis. In so doing, questionnaires coupled with direct observation and interviews were administered on total of five hundred respondents randomly selected from five zones in the study area. The study found a number of factors causing the conflicts and recommends creative problemsolving strategies, amongst others, for managing such conflicts amongst occupiers of tenement houses in the study area

Impact of rational and experiential thinking styles on interpersonal conflict resolution among young adults

This research aimed to find the relationship between thinking styles (rational or experiential) and interpersonal conflict resolution (ICR) in young adults. A sample of 99 females and 103 males, age range 18 to 40 years, was selected via convenient and snow-ball sampling. Thinking styles were assessed using Rational-Experiential Inventory-40, and ICR was measured using Conflict Resolution Questionnaire. Regression analysis was used to predict ICR based on thinking style covariates and several relevant demographic covariates, including gender and family birth order. Rational thinking style (RTS) was most prevalent among young adults and was the strongest predictor of ICR. In addition, gender was a significant predictor. These findings may help in coaching young adults toward a well-integrated personality by using rational thinking for effective ICR

Organizational Primacy after the Demise of the Organizational Career: Employment Conflict in a Post-Standard Contract World

[Excerpt] There is a contradiction at the heart of dispute resolution in the contemporary workplace. The locus of determination of the terms and conditions of employment, including processes for the resolution of disputes concerning these terms and conditions, has become increasingly decentralized to the organizational level, at the same time that long term attachment of employee careers to these same organizations has been diminishing. The result is a disconnect between the nature of current employment disputes, which increasingly involve issues relating to entry to and exit from relationships with organizations, including questions of the formation and content of employment contracts, and dispute resolution procedures that assume membership within an organizational community and acceptance of its rules and norms. In this paper, I examine these two trends in employment dispute resolution and explore the tensions between them. I begin by discussing the increase in organizational ordering of terms and conditions of employment and how it is reflected in the development of organizationally focused dispute resolution mechanisms. Then I turn to examining examples of types of growing employment conflicts that revolve around issues relating to the formation and termination of employment relationships. Following this, I conclude by discussing how dispute resolution procedures and systems might be re-envisioned to better fit a world in which standard long-term employment contracts with a single organization are no longer the paradigmatic model

Public Participation in Hazard Management: The Use of Citizen Panels in the U.S.

After discussing the need for citizen participation in Risk management and a method of facilitating such participation as developed in Germany, the authors discuss and analyze its subsequent modification and use in a sewage sludge management project in New Jersey