, Volume 27, Issue 2, pp 111–142

Teleological Justification of Argumentation Schemes


    • Centre for Research in Reasoning, Argumentation and Rhetoric (CRRAR)University of Windsor
  • Giovanni Sartor
    • Law DepartmentEuropean University Institute
    • Faculty of LawCIRSFID-University of Bologna

DOI: 10.1007/s10503-012-9262-y

Cite this article as:
Walton, D. & Sartor, G. Argumentation (2013) 27: 111. doi:10.1007/s10503-012-9262-y


Argumentation schemes are forms of reasoning that are fallible but correctable within a self-correcting framework. Their use provides a basis for taking rational action or for reasonably accepting a conclusion as a tentative hypothesis, but they are not deductively valid. We argue that teleological reasoning can provide the basis for justifying the use of argument schemes both in monological and dialogical reasoning. We consider how such a teleological justification, besides being inspired by the aim of directing a bounded cognizer to true belief and correct choices, needs to take into account the attitudes of dialogue partners as well as normative models of dialogue and communicative activity types, in particular social and cultural settings.


Defeasible reasoningArtificial intelligenceForms of argumentPractical reasoningTeleological reasoningIntelligent deliberation

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012