Abstract

The main claim of the present paper is to defend that some specific oral debate forms of the African traditions seem to correspond structurally speaking to non-monotonic reasoning in a way that is not that different from nowadays argumentation-based approaches of legal reasoning within the context of western juridical systems. So, the aim of this survey consists in two points: on the one hand, we will show that polemical debates in African oral traditions implement systematically a non-monotonic inference, that is closed to what Aristotle termed by “dialectical arguments”; on the other hand, we are suggesting a way to deal with non-monotonic inference in a dialogical framework.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.