This book presents the historical, theoretical and empirical foundations of educational practices involving dialogue and argumentation.

Because of the need to devise systems for electronic communication on the internet, multi-agent computing is moving to a model of communication as a structured conversation between rational agents. For example, in multi-agent systems, an electronic agent searches around the internet, and collects certain kinds of information by asking questions to other agents. Such agents also reason with each other when they engage in negotiation and persuasion. It is shown in this book that critical argumentation is best represented in this framework by the model of reasoned argument called a dialog, in which two or more parties engage in a polite and orderly exchange with each other according to rules governed by conversation policies. In such dialog argumentation, the two parties reason together by taking turns asking questions, offering replies, and offering reasons to support a claim. They try to settle their disagreements by an orderly conversational exchange that is partly adversarial and partly collaborative.

In the spirit of models of argument starting with inquiry, this book starts with a question: What might it mean to teach argument in ways that open up spaces for change—changes of mind, changes of practice and policy, changes in ways of talking and relating? The author explores teaching argument in ways that take into account the complexities and pluralities young people face as they attempt to enact local and global citizenship with others who may reasonably disagree. The focus is foremost on social action—the hard, hopeful work of finding productive ways forward in contexts where people need to work together across difference to get something worthwhile done.

Dialogues represents argument not as a battle to be won, but as a process of dialogue and deliberation-the exchange of opinions and ideas-among people with different values and perspectives. Part One contains succinct instruction on analyzing and developing arguments, including critical reading, source documentation, and analyzing visual arguments. Part Two, updated with many new readings addressing current issues, offers a diverse collection of provocative essays from both the popular and scholarly medium. The lucid, lively, and engaging writing addresses students as writers and thinkers, without overwhelming them with unnecessary jargon or theory.

The context of mediation immediately highlights the importance of argumentation as a means to reasonably handle conflict. "Argumentation in dispute mediation" tackles this topic providing both theoretical insights and detailed empirical argumentative analysis. Its goal is twofold: to explore mediation as a real-life context of argumentation and to show how an increased argumentative awareness could improve conflict resolution.Particular emphasis is accorded to mapping mediation through an interdisciplinary reasoned review of existing accounts. The outline of a conceptual framework of mediation constitutes a solid basis for the study of argumentation in mediation. The argumentative analysis of a corpus of mediation cases, based on the pragma-dialectical account and the Argumentum Model of Topics, shows the mediator s moves which actually help conflicting parties discuss reasonably. The mediator s topical potential plays a crucial role in this relation at the levels of issue selection, evoking of cultural-contextual premises and choice of argument schemes."

Offers an alternative interpretation and defends a radically new view of Plato's method of argument in the early dialogues.