[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] Indexes: Main | Date | Thread | Author

Re: [ba-unrev-talk] Four Goals (was)Fwd: [issues] reply to Tony's comment

A software tool called Reason!Able helps expands the brain's capacity to cope with
complex arguments.    (01)

E.G., For the case of reducing our use of fossil fuels, try using Reason!Able - an
introductory PowerPoint presentation. Download the zip file (500k)
<  http://www.goreason.com/presentations/Using_ReasonAble.zip >    (02)

Also, here's some interesting papers relative to ba-unrev-talk and interest in
argument mapping:    (03)

1) What is Argument Mapping?
< http://www.austhink.org/argumentmapping/ >    (04)

What is reasoning and argumentation?
Reasoning and argumentation are closely related. Reasoning is a cognitive
activity, argumentation is reasoning, exercised in a social context.    (05)

3) Argument Mapping with Reason!Able    (06)

van Gelder, T. J. (forthcoming). Argument Mapping with Reason!Able. The American
Philosophical Association Newsletter on Philosophy and Computers    (07)

"[I]t is also important to realise that these are early days in the development of
computer-supported argument mapping. Back in 1962, Douglas Englebart imagined and
predicted computer-supported argument mapping as a means of augmenting human
intellect (Engelbart,
1962). Four decades later, his vision is at last starting to be realised.
Reason!Able (and other packages available today) are like Model T Fords compared
with the automobiles of today, let alone the “maglevs”5 of the future. I brashly
predict that once the technology becomes sufficiently advanced, those who deal
with complex arguments for a living will switch to the new methods just as the
accounting profession has switched entirely to computer packages in preference to
the old system of ledgers and manual entries and calculations."    (08)

3) Enhancing Deliberation Through Computer Supported Argument Mapping    (09)

van Gelder, T. J. (forthcoming). Enhancing Deliberation Through Computer-Supported
Argument Mapping. In P. Kirschner & S. Buckingham Shum & C. Carr (Eds.),
Visualizing Argumentation: Software Tools for Collaborative and Educational
Sense-Making. London: Springer-Verlag.    (010)

"Deliberation is the primary means by which we strive for, and sometimes actually
find, the truth on important, complex issues. Anything which enhances deliberation
thereby enhances our ability to know the truth. Argument mapping can substantially
enhance deliberation, relative to traditional practices; indeed, I know of no
other approach which can make a comparable difference. The emergence of new,
dedicated argument-mapping support tools will, I believe, enable argument mapping
to become widespread practice in schools, and in the workplace, in domains as
various as policy making, research, politics, the law, and dispute resolution. If
all this is correct, computer-supported argument mapping ought, in the long run,
contribute substantially to human well-being. In this sense, our project is a
extension of the Enlightenment vision of progress through the refinement and
application of Reason."    (011)

More info
< http://www.philosophy.unimelb.edu.au/reason/ >    (012)

Other Software Tools    (013)

"Araucaria is a software tool (written in Java) for analysing arguments. It aids a
user in reconstructing and diagramming an argument using a simple point-and-click
interface. The software also supports argumentation schemes, and provides a
user-customisable set of schemes with which to analyse arguments.    (014)

Once arguments have been analysed they can be saved in a portable format called
"XML". XML is a flexible language which can easily be used to generate web pages
and data with which to populate a database."    (015)

The software is free (it is released under the GNU General Public License) and
version 1.0 is now available for download. <
http://www.computing.dundee.ac.uk/staff/creed/araucaria/download.html >
< http://www.computing.dundee.ac.uk/staff/creed/araucaria/index.html >    (016)

The Athena software (written in Java) is designed to support analysis and
production of reasoning and argumentation by students in higher education at
undergraduate and postgraduate levels.    (017)

ATHENA ISSA 2002.zip (350kB)
<  http://www.athenasoft.org/sub/documents/ATHENA%20ISSA%202002.zip >    (018)

This is a presentation of the design ideas behind Athena software and education. A
comparison with a similar package (ReasonAble) is provided.    (019)

The Athena 2.0 computer program may be used freely for non-commercial purposes.
< http://www.athenasoft.org/sub/software.htm >    (020)

The project has been sponsored by The Council for the Renewal of Higher Education,
The National Agency for Higher Education, Stockholm, Sweden
< http://www.athenasoft.org/ >    (021)

http://www.goreason.com    (022)

c) GeNIe (Graphical Network Interface) and SMILE (Structural Modeling, Inference,
and Learning Engine)    (023)

Directed to the high- end of the user spectrum is the program Genie, produced at
Carnegie- Mellon University, Pittsburgh. Genie enables the user to draw influence
diagrams and calculate conditional probabilities and expected utilities on the
basis of probabilities and utilities, entered by an expert user.
< http://www2.sis.pitt.edu/~genie/about_genie.html >    (024)

The three levels of software differ with respect to how much of calculation they
employ. At a low level, Belvedere contains no calculations. Reason! Able and
Athena, at a middle level, contain some assignments of numbers and, in Athena,
some capacities for helping the user to use certain rules- of thumb for filtering
away his worst arguments. Genie, finally, contains advanced theory-based
capacities for calculations, based on expected utility and Bayesian probabilities.    (025)

Jack Park wrote:    (026)

> Paul Werbos, responding to some comments by Tony Judge on the Issues list,
> lists 4 goals,  aiming towards which, in his opinion, are crucial to the
> future.
> >From: "Paul J. Werbos" <pwerbos@nsf.gov>
> >
> ><snip>
> >
> >In my view, the hope of developing a sustainable global energy system is
> >to the hope of achieving global sustainability on earth. Because we have
> >some unique points of leverage and capability related to that
> >goal, it is reasonable for us to spend a disproportionately large share of
> >our time on that goal (among others), relative to other goals --
> >like water, food, population, war-and-peace and education -- which are
> >equally critical, which merit our very part-time support, but which we cannot
> >influence quite as much, at the present time. "We" meaning me and my
> >friend at this moment.
> >
> >No matter what taxes and quotas and laws and new age prayers to Gaia we
> >can try to invoke... it seems pretty clear that we could
> >not achieve a globally sustainably energy system without either radical
> >changes in technology or throwing billions of people into poverty
> >or starvation... and I prefer the former.
> >
> >Assuming we do not accept the billions-more-in-poverty scenarios, a
> >sustainable global energy system must include a web of technologies which
> >allows one to meet (at least) four (principal) constraints simultaneously:
> >
> >(1) An increase in the available supply of energy AS SUCH, from unlimited
> >sources, without a big increase in price;
> >
> >(2) An increase in the supply of TRANSPORTATION FUEL, also from unlimited
> >sources, without a big increase in price per mile;
> >
> >(3) Zero net CO2 emission for it all;
> >
> >(4) The ability to do all this without depending on the use of nuclear
> >power plants in the developing world. (I would not
> >use the word "sustainable" to describe what would happen if the
> >availability of nuclear materials and technology were to be
> >multiplied a thousand-fold beyond what the creaky status quo already looks
> >like in the developing world.)
> >
> >It is simply not proven that these constraints can ever be met -- but
> >there are a number of promising options for high-risk
> >high-potential research, and there is a clear need for the world to
> >maximize all truly plausible options along these lines.
> >There is a huge amount of rhetoric and short-term research whose funders
> >talk about sustainability... but precious little on
> >those options which address the hope of really ACHIEVING the four goals.
> >(Some people call it "making progress" to spend
> >billions on tweaking gasoline-burning internal combustion engines... but
> >1,000 years of that would not get us to the ultimate
> >point we need to aim for. When governments mandate or even just
> >incentivize that sort of thing, they actually reduce
> >our chances of making it in the long term, because they distract attention
> >from tehe more radical things we need to be doing.)
> >
> >Anyway... no need for me to go on TO[O] long on this... someone needs to
> >really attend to the technical nitty-gritty of these
> >issues... someone must "take out THAT trash".... ESPECIALLY BECAUSE there
> >has been precious little serious substantive support
> >for what really needs to be done. And a lot of that requires dialogue with
> >the folks who are critical to developing that
> >technology.
> >
> ><snip>
> >Best of luck,
> >
> >     Paul W.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> XML Topic Maps: Creating and Using Topic Maps for the Web.
> Addison-Wesley, ISBN 0-201-74960-2.
> http://www.nexist.org/wiki/User0Blog    (027)

Introducing NetZero Long Distance
Unlimited Long Distance only $29.95/ month!
Sign Up Today! www.netzerolongdistance.com    (028)