How can logic best be applied to arguments?

Abstract

This talk surveys a number of methods currently being developed that assist in applying logic to the evaluation of arguments used in particular cases. A case is seen as specied by a given text and context of discourse. The methods used are pragmatic, and are based on the Gricean Cooperative Principle (CP), as implemented in several types of goal-directed conversational exchanges. How can logic best be applied to arguments? The goal of this address is to extend the boundaries of the subject known as logic towards the task of evaluating arguments as found in given cases of natural language argumentation. Of course, recently in philosophy, many influential voices are saying precisely that it is not possible to carry out this task (in an objective way that would be suitable for use in logic). I will argue that it can be done, or at least that there are resources available that can be brought to bear to show this task is quite possible and doable (at least, to some already worthwhile degree). These resources need to be drawn from work in several elds through a collaborative interdisciplinary project, for this eort towards an applied (or so-called informal) logic to advance further. Unfortunately, even the current term ‘informal logic’is unnecessarily divisive.