Argumentation Schemes

Here we consider each cell in an ACH matrix as an application of one of Walton's argumentation schemes, drawn from the list put together by ReasoningLab. Taking the Fortitude South initial ACH matrix as an example:

Argument from Consequences

Argument from Established Rule

Argument from Evidence to a Hypothesis

Argument from Position to Know

Argument from Falsification of a Hypothesis

Argument from Cause to Effect

Argument from Expert Opinion

Notes

The conclusion of the Argument from Consequences scheme is: A should (not) be brought about, and has a critical question: Are there other consequences of the opposite value that should be taken into account? This suggests that Argument from Consequences is about choosing the one option that has the best consequences, and that it would be reasonable to construct a sub-argument that just considers SHORTEST, STRONGPOINT, EXPANSION and VSITES to decide the issue. Conflicting choices are a fact of life. There may not be an objectively "best" answer, and resolution may mean simply expressing a preference.

For this example, Argument from Established Rule is about applying military doctrine. It doesn't suggest that only one outcome makes sense, but rather that each application of doctrine favours a specific outcome "subject to penalty". Again it may may sense to consider Argument from Established Rule lines of evidence separately, and compare any "penalties". Argument from Expert Opinion is similar, but puts faith in expert judgement rather than established doctrine.

Argument from Evidence to a Hypothesis is relevant to any evidence that is collected to support or contradict one of the hypotheses in question. It is broadly similar to Argument from Cause to Effect. The difference seems to be that former is abductive and the latter inductive, and the latter also requires some justification of causation as well as correlation. Taken together, these lines of evidence are indicators.

Argument from Position to Know is like Argument from Expert Opinion in that there are issues of trust and credibility that bear on the acceptability of the argument. In other respects, it is another indicator.

We reserve Argument from Falsification of a Hypothesis for evidence that would clearly rule out a hypothesis - which we don't have...