Repository | Book | Chapter
(2016) Epistemology, knowledge and the impact of interaction, Dordrecht, Springer.
Defeasible argumentation in African oral traditions. a special case of dealing with the non-monotonic inference in a dialogical framework
Gildas Nzokou
pp. 323-341
The main claim of the present paper is to defend that some specific oral debate forms of the African traditions seem to correspond structurally speaking to non-monotonic reasoning in a way that is not that different from nowadays argumentation-based approaches of legal reasoning within the context of western juridical systems. So, the aim of this survey consists in two points: on the one hand, we will show that polemical debates in African oral traditions implement systematically a non-monotonic inference, that is closed to what Aristotle termed by "dialectical arguments"; on the other hand, we are suggesting a way to deal with non-monotonic inference in a dialogical framework.
Publication details
Full citation:
Nzokou, G. (2016)., Defeasible argumentation in African oral traditions. a special case of dealing with the non-monotonic inference in a dialogical framework, in J. Redmond, O. Martins & Ã. Fernández (eds.), Epistemology, knowledge and the impact of interaction, Dordrecht, Springer, pp. 323-341.
This document is unfortunately not available for download at the moment.