Value Based Argumentation Frameworks
In many cases of disagreement it is impossible to demonstrate that either party is wrong. The role of argument in such cases to to persuade rather than refute. Following Perelman, we argue that persuasion relies on a recognition that the strength of an argument depends on the value it advances, and that whether an attack of one argument on another succeeds depends on the comparative strength of the values advanced by the arguments. To model this we extend the standard notion of Argumentation Frameworks (AFs) to Value Based Argumentation Frameworks (VAFs). After defining VAFs we explore their properties, proving some results for VAFs with two values, and show how they can provide a rational basis for the acceptance or rejection of arguments, even where this would appear to be a matter of choice in a standard AF. In particular, we show that in a VAF certain arguments can be shown to be acceptable independent of the relative strengths of the values involved.
For each technical report listed here, copyright and all intellectual property rights remain with the respective authors. Copyright is effective from the year of publication in each case. By downloading a file from this page, you agree to use it only for purposes of research and scholarship. Any other use of this material or storage of it in any medium or its sale or distribution in any form is expressly forbidden without prior written permission from the authors concerned.