The research undertakes a critical study of informal fallacies in some socio-political and religious discourses in Ghana. It clearly and aptly demonstrates that the aforementioned discourses are mostly, if not, always laced with fallacies which obscure and distort clear and critical thinking. The study shows that language, which is the fundamental means by which to engage in socio-political discourse, can be viewed as a complicated tool which is open to misuse and abuse. It shows that language used in socio-political discourses is more often than not utilized poorly, and as such assertions and appeals can be confused with factual/logical inaccuracies. Statements can be formulated in ways that make their content dangerously vague, ambiguous or generally misleading. The research shows that although fallacies can be committed intentionally or unintentionally, in discourses in general, they are mostly, if not always, committed intentionally in socio-political discourse so as to achieve political gains and agenda. Another area of discourse that is tackled in this work where fallacies frequently occur is the religious sector. The study notes that matters of religion are mostly matters that are delicate to handle as these matters are mostly, again if not always, based on faith. It is shown herein that many a time, religious personalities use fallacious as means to drive their religious agenda across. The research then looks at what these aforementioned fallacies imply in relation to socio-political and religious discourses. It proceeds to discuss the positive implications of fallacies before it progresses to the negative implications of same. It then asks how a fallacy will be beneficial to a person and or how it will disadvantage the same person. If fallacies often occur in socio-political and religious discourses, then one must have the ability to detect these fallacies and try to avoid them. The work discusses how to detect fallacies and how to avoid them. It makes bold claims that if one has knowledge about fallacies then one will be able to avoid them. / Philosophy, Practical and Systematic Theology / Ph. D. (Philosophy)

MA (Xitsonga) / Ehansi Ka Senthara ya M. E. R. Mathivha ya Tindzimi ta Afrika Vutshila na Mfuwo / Xikongomelonkulu xa ndzavisiso lowu i ku xopaxopa maendli mo susa ma xiendliwa xin’we eka Xitsonga hi ku kongomisa eka tindlela leti ma tirhaka hatona exivulweni. Xikongomelo lexi xi aviwa hi marhavi manharhu. Rhavi ro sungula ri kongomana na ku xopaxopa maendli mo susa lama paluxaka mukhuva na mbuyelo hi xikongomelo xo kumisisa michumu leyi nga tirhaka tanihi tiagumente ta nhlokomhaka na tiagumente ta swiendliwa, xikan’we na ku lavisisa michumu leyi nga tirhaka tanihi switirho swa maendli mo susa. Rhavi ra vumbirhi rona ri langutana na ku lavisisa maendli mo susa ma xiendliwa xin’we lama paluxaka mukhuva na mbuyelo lama tirheke eswivulweni ma ri na swivulwana swa mahlanganisi swa xivangelo, xikongomelo na xipimelo. Kasi rhavi ra vunharhu ri tirhana no kambisisa tinhlamuselo/mitirho ya xisemantiki leyi nyikiwaka tiagumemnte hi maendli mo susa ma xiendliwa xin’we lama paluxaka mukhuva na mbuyelo. Eka ndzavisiso lowu ku tirhisiwa thiyori ya vunongoti, ku nga thiyori leyi kongomanaka na ndlela leyi vanhu va twisisaka xiswona marito. Mhaka leyi endlekaka eka thiyori leyi, hi leswi vanhu va twisisaka xiswona marito emiehleketweni ya vona eka leswi ma vulaka swona hi ku angarhela. Swiphemu swa nkoka leswi thiyori leyi yi jikajikaka eka swona i nhlokomhaka leyi nga xiendli xa leswi susiwaka, riendli leri hlamuselaka leswi susiwaka na hilaha swi susiwaka hakona, xiendliwa lexi khumbekaka hileswi vuriwaka hi riendli, na xilandzelandzhaku lexi nga vaka ndhawu, xitirho na swin’wana ni swin’wana. Ndzavisiso lowu wu endliwa hi ku landzelela maendlelo ma nkoka, laha ku nga na maendlelo mambirhi mo kongoma ehansi ka wona; ku nga mo tirhisa ntlawa wo karhi wa vavulavuri va Xitsonga lava nga xiyayiya swivulwa leswi mulavisisi a swi vumbeke leswi vaka swi tirhisile maendli mo susa. Mulavisisi u lulamisile papila ra swivutiso leri longoloxeke swivulwa leswi a lavaka leswaku vavulavuri lava va swi xiyayiya ku xiya loko swi twala kumbe swi nga twali na maendlelo ma nxopaxopo wa vundzeni bya tsalwa lama tirhisiwaka ku xopaxopa swivulwa leswi nga tirhisiwa tanihi mahungu ya ndzavisiso lowu. / NRF

Les présomptions interviennent pour corriger les lacunes du raisonnement juridique. Elles sont traditionnellement définies comme « des conséquences que la loi ou le magistrat tire d’un fait connu à un fait inconnu ». Les présomptions occupent un rôle important en droit de la propriété intellectuelle car la recherche de la vérité ainsi que le traitement du doute en constituent l’essence. Qu’il s’agisse d’appréhender les objets (œuvre de l’esprit, invention, marque, etc.), de désigner les acteurs (titulaires ou contrefacteurs) ou de délimiter le contenu des droits de propriété intellectuelle, l’usage des présomptions est incontournable. Cependant, les nouveaux défis (numérique, mondialisation de l’économie, communautarisation du droit, etc.) auxquels sont confrontées les créations immatérielles conduisent le législateur et le juge à galvauder les présomptions. On assiste à une inflation voire une densification de la « norme présomptive » en droit de la propriété intellectuelle : il y a une présomption pour presque tout, sur presque tout et presque partout. Cela fragilise le système de protection des créations immatérielles et, fatalement, engendre une insécurité juridique en droit de la propriété intellectuelle. L’objectif de notre thèse est d’analyser ce que recouvre réellement l’idée de présomptions en droit de la propriété intellectuelle et de délimiter concrètement leur champ d’action (première partie). Cette démarche envisage à terme de proposer une théorie générale des présomptions à partir de laquelle les présomptions applicables en propriété intellectuelle pourraient s’identifier et tirer leur légitimité (deuxième partie). Une telle approche permettra de fournir une grille de lecture plus pertinente tant aux théoriciens qu’aux praticiens de la matière pour aborder efficacement les problématiques inhérentes à ce domaine dont la complexité n’est plus à présenter. / Presumptions in intellectual property law, analysis in the light of general lawPresumptions intervene to correct shortcomings in legal reasoning. They are traditionally defined as "consequences that the law or the magistrate draws from a known fact to an unknown fact". Presumptions play an important role in intellectual property law because the search for truth and the treatment of doubt are its essence. Whether it is to apprehend the objects (intellectual work, invention, trademark, etc.), to designate the actors (owners or counterfeiters) or to delimit the content of the intellectual property rights, the use of presumptions is unavoidable. However, the new challenges (digital, globalization of the economy, communalization of the law, etc.) faced by intangible creations force the legislator and the judge to squander the presumptions. We are witnessing inflation and even densification of the "presumptive norm" in intellectual property law: there is a presumption for almost everything, on almost everything and almost everywhere. This weakens the system of protection of intangible creations and, inevitably, creates unprecedented legal uncertainty in intellectual property law. The aim of our thesis is to analyze what the idea of presumptions in intellectual property law really covers and to concretely define their field of action. This approach ultimately aims to propose a general theory of presumptions from which the presumptions applicable in intellectual property could identify and draw their legitimacy. Such an approach that will provide a reading grid more relevant to both theorists and practitioners of the subject to effectively address the issues inherent in this area whose complexity is more to present.

Sveriges migrationspolitik och debatten om den har genomgått betydande förändringar under de tio år som följt reformen av systemet 2008. Den här uppsatsen tittar på debatten i riksdagen om arbetskraftsinvandring från 2008 till 2018 och svarar på två frågor. 1. Hur ser konfliktlinjerna ut i svensk arbets- kraftsinvandringspolitisk debatt? 2. Hur har partiernas arbetskraftsinvandringspolitiska argumentation förändrats över tid? För att svara på frågorna konstrueras typargument utifrån en tvådimensionell skala över migrationspolitik med en materiell och en immateriell axel, samt tidigare erfarenheter av hur partier argumenterat för mer öppen respektive restriktiv politik. Inläggen i debatterna kodas sedan utifrån vilka av typargumenten som används. De svenska partierna går att dela in i två grupper: fem partier som är konsekvent för en mer öppen arbetskraftsinvandringspolitik – M, C, KD, FP och MP – och tre partier som är konsekvent för en mer restriktiv politik – S, V och SD. Den tvådimensionella modellen av migrationspolitisk konflikt är dåligt lämpad för att beskriva konflikten mellan dessa kluster. Bland de öppna använder Allianspartierna och i synnerhet M en mer materiell argumentation medan MP använder en mer immateriell argumentation. Bland de restriktiva använder S och V nästan uteslutande hänvisningar till att arbetskraftsinvandringen riskerar att pressa löner och villkor på den svenska arbetsmarknaden, medan SD också hänvisar till andra argument. Nästan ingen argumentation för mer restriktiv politik är immateriell. Över tid har argumentationen för en mer öppen arbetskraftsinvandring förändrats signifikant i riktning mot mer materiella och mindre immateriella argument, medan den restriktiva argumentationen har varit oförändrad. Troligen finns ett samband med den migrations- politiska debattens utveckling mot en mer restriktiv diskurs. / Swedish migration policy and the debate surrounding it has undergone significant changes during the ten years that have past since the reform of 2008. This thesis looks at the debate in the Swedish parliament on labour migration from 2008 to 2018, and answers questions. 1. What are the conflict lines in Swedish labour migration policy debate? 2. How has the parties’ argumentation on labour immigration policy changed over time? To answer the questions, type arguments are created on a two-dimensional field with a material and an non-material axis, as well as previous experience of how parties argued for more open or restrictive policies. The arguments are coded with the type arguments used. The Swedish parties can be divided in two groups: five parties that are consistently for a more open labour migration policy – the Moderates, Centre Party, Christian Democrats, Liberals and Green Party – and three parties that are consistently for a more restrictive policy – the Social Democrats, Left Party and Sweden Democrats. The two-dimensional model of migration policy conflict is poorly suited to describe the conflict between these clusters. Among the open, the centre-right parties and especially the Moderates, use a more material argumentation, while the Green Party use a more non-material argumentation. Among the restrictive, the Social Democrats and Left Party use almost exclusively references to the fact that labor migration risks pressing wages and conditions on the Swedish labour market, while the Sweden Democrats also refer to other arguments. Almost no argumentation for more restrictive policy is non-material. Over time, the argumentation for a more open labour migration changed significantly towards more material and less non-material arguments, while the restrictive argumentation has remained unchanged. There is probably a connection with the development of the migration policy debate towards a more restrictive discourse.

The purpose of this study is to pay attention to, and examine Hilma Hofstedts contribution in the struggle for woman’s sexual and social rights at the start of the 20th century. This is done by analyzing Hofstedts lecture on poverty an birth controll called ”Fattigdom- barnalstring”. The tools for the analysis is based on Toulmins method of argumentation analysis, where Hofsteds argumnets för birth control is essential for the result. The result from this study shows that Hofstedts lecture reflects on the contemporary debat while it also was part of a larger movement that would help to change the women’s sexual- and social preconditions fundamentally.

Este trabalho examina a interpretação dos dispositivos constitucionais que atribuem competências tributárias aos entes federados (União, Estados, Distrito Federal e Municípios). Tais enunciados normativos constituem o material bruto a partir do qual o intérprete reconstrói as chamadas "regras de competência tributária": normas que predeterminam aquilo que pode ser objeto de disciplina pelo legislador infraconstitucional para criação de tributos. A presente obra tem duas finalidades. De um lado, pretende analisar a questão do "como" se atribui significado a esses dispositivos. Nesse sentido, enfrenta questões ligadas à teoria da interpretação, aos tipos de operações realizadas pelos intérpretes e aos limites da atividade interpretativa. De outro lado, propõe-se a examinar a questão do "porquê" o significado atribuído é o correto, e não outro. Isto é, por que o significado "X" – e não o significado "Y" ou "Z" – deve ser considerado como a melhor interpretação de determinada expressão constitucional usada para delimitar o poder de tributar? Para responder a essa pergunta, o trabalho investiga os argumentos utilizados no âmbito do STF e os fundamentos constitucionais que lhes emprestam força para justificar as decisões interpretativas. Ao final, o trabalho propõe diretrizes materiais de preferência argumentativa, de tal modo a viabilizar algum controle sobre a interpretação dos dispositivos constitucionais responsáveis por limitar o poder tributário estatal. / This dissertation examines the interpretation of constitutional provisions that assign tax power to federal entities (Union, States, Federal District and Municipalities). These normative statements constitute the raw material from which the interpreter reconstructs the so-called "tax competence rules": norms that predetermine what can be subject to discipline by the infraconstitutional legislator to create taxes. The present work has two purposes. On one hand, it aims to analyze the question of "how" meaning is assigned to these provisions. In this sense, it deals with issues related to the theory of interpretation, the operations performed by the interpreters and the limits of interpretive activity. On the other hand, it sets out to examine the question of "why" the assigned meaning is the correct one, and not another. That is, why meaning "X" - and not meaning "Y" or "Z" - should be considered the best interpretation of a certain constitutional expression used to set limits on the power to tax? To answer this question, this work investigates the arguments used by the Brazilian Supreme Court (STF) and the constitutional foundations that give them strength to justify interpretive decisions. Ultimately, this work proposes material guidelines of argumentative preference, in order to allow some control over the interpretation of constitutional provisions responsible for limiting the state tax power.

In this dissertation, a normative prescriptive paradigm, namely a Bayesian theory of content-dependent argument strength, was employed in order to investigate argumentation, specifically the classic fallacy of the &ldquo / argument from ignorance&rdquo / or &ldquo / argumentum ad ignorantiam&rdquo / . The study was carried out in Turkish with Turkish participants. In the Bayesian framework, argument strength is determined by the interactions between three major factors: prior belief, polarity, and evidence reliability. In addition, topic effects are considered. Three experiments were conducted. The first experiment replicated Hahn et al.&rsquo / s (2005) study in Turkish to investigate whether similar results would be obtained in a different linguistic and cultural community. We found significant main effects of three of the manipulated factors in Oaksford and Hahn (2004) and Hahn et al. (2005): prior belief, reliability and topic. With respect to the Bayesian analysis, the overall fit between the data and the model was very good. The second experiment tested the hypothesis that argument acceptance would not vary across different intelligence levels. There was no significant main effect of prior belief, polarity, topic, and intelligence. We found a main effect of reliability only. However, further analyses on significant interactions showed that more intelligent subjects were less inclined to accept negative polarity items. Finally, the third experiment investigated the hypothesis that argument acceptance would vary depending on the presence of and the kind of evidentiality markers prevalent in Turkish, indicating the certainty with which events in the past have happened, marked with overt morpho-syntactic markers (&ndash / DI or &ndash / mIs). The experiment found a significant main effect of evidentiality as well as replicating the significant main effects of the two of the manipulated factors (prior belief and reliability) in Oaksford and Hahn (2004), Hahn et al. (2005) and in our first experiment. Furthermore, reliability and evidentiality interacted, indicating separate as well as combined effects of the two. With respect to the Bayesian analysis, the overall fit between the data and the model was lower than the one in the first experiment, but still acceptable. Overall, this study supported the normative Bayesian approach to studying argumentation in an interdisciplinary perspective, combining computation, psychology, linguistics, and philosophy.

Deliberative democracy has been promoted as a way improving legitimacy and political equality in policy debates. This dissertation seeks to understand how deliberation takes place within the intersection of two unique spaces: dialogue among members of regional civil society groups and communication in online fora. The motivation for this research is based on the notion that existing forms of decision-making have contributed to political inequality, a major issue in areas such as the Caribbean. Accordingly I examine the online discussions of three different civil society groups in the Caribbean. I looked at how certain variables in these fora were related to three of the main dimensions of deliberation, the use of reasoned arguments, reciprocity and reflection. With regard to reasoned arguments I examined how diversity among members, the participation of the moderator and the topic and scope of the conversation were pertinent to a discussion in a regional and multi-national setting. For reciprocity I looked at how variables related to time and the posting structure of a conversation were relevant in an online forum. Finally I looked at the strategies that were employed by participants as part of the communication process in an online forum and how these were related to processes of reflection. To address these questions I used a combination of content analysis and conversation analysis of email conversations and interviews with participants. One set of contributions from this dissertation is methodological through the development of a codebook and the novel application of conversation analysis to online deliberation. Also, the results are significant and can contribute to our understanding of deliberation in a context for which there has been little previous research. For example, I showed that national and occupational diversity can contribute to an increase in the proportion of reasoned arguments used in a conversation as does the presence of the moderator. However, these factors along with the scope and topic of a thread vary in their degree of influence on the use of reasoned arguments by the civil society group in question. I also showed that there are specific communication strategies that participants employ such as preference organization or speaker selection that are related to different forms of reflection evident in a conversation. Finally I observed that the posting structure of a conversation specifically the distribution of emails that participants send becomes less equal as reciprocity increases. This does not augur well for a deliberative ideal that envisions both reciprocity and equal participation. Furthermore, when considering deliberation as a whole, the results indicate that its different parts are not always correlated with each other. None of the lists has more than one significant correlation between the three dimensions of deliberation. In fact, reciprocity and the use of reasoned arguments were never significantly correlated in any of the lists. Together these results point to another main finding of this dissertation which is deliberation as a whole is difficult to observe in practice. Nevertheless I suggest that separately the results for each dimension can be useful from both a design perspective and for policy-makers in general. For example, encouraging the sharing of information and a more active moderator, having the opportunity to discuss regional issues could all help to promote a greater use of reasoned arguments overall. Experimenting with different ways in which group members can get to know each other might help to reduce the disparity between participation and reciprocity. Also encouraging participants to reply inline where possible, creating easier access to the message archives and having a system for collating threads and discussions online could all promote better reflection in the lists. Finally the list might benefit from having members go through an exercise of determining whether or not and in what way decision-making should be part of their discussions. With regard to policy-makers I note that several members reported benefits for policy-makers who themselves were members of the lists. This could stem from listening and learning from the discussions of other members or actually contributing to discussions. The groups also showed the potential to collate many different policy positions around a specific problem, thus assisting policy makers in understanding issues at a regional level.

Undersökningen ämnar öka förståelsen för och analysera hur fastighetsföretag marknadsför gröna argument och hur de uppfattar att intressenterna bemöter dessa. I uppsatsen studeras följande forskningsfrågor: * Vilka strategier används hos fastighetsföretag inom ramen för green business? * Hur kommunicerar fastighetsföretag green business genom grön marknadsföring? * Hur uppfattar fastighetsföretagen att intressenterna bemöter deras gröna marknadsföringsargument? / The study intends to increase the understanding of and to analyze how real-estate companies market green arguments and how they perceive that stakeholders respond to these. The paper studied the following research questions: * What strategies are used by real-estate companies within green business? * How do real-estate companies communicate green business through green marketing? * How do the real estate companies perceive that stakeholders respond to their green marketing pitch?

Este trabalho examina a interpretação dos dispositivos constitucionais que atribuem competências tributárias aos entes federados (União, Estados, Distrito Federal e Municípios). Tais enunciados normativos constituem o material bruto a partir do qual o intérprete reconstrói as chamadas "regras de competência tributária": normas que predeterminam aquilo que pode ser objeto de disciplina pelo legislador infraconstitucional para criação de tributos. A presente obra tem duas finalidades. De um lado, pretende analisar a questão do "como" se atribui significado a esses dispositivos. Nesse sentido, enfrenta questões ligadas à teoria da interpretação, aos tipos de operações realizadas pelos intérpretes e aos limites da atividade interpretativa. De outro lado, propõe-se a examinar a questão do "porquê" o significado atribuído é o correto, e não outro. Isto é, por que o significado "X" – e não o significado "Y" ou "Z" – deve ser considerado como a melhor interpretação de determinada expressão constitucional usada para delimitar o poder de tributar? Para responder a essa pergunta, o trabalho investiga os argumentos utilizados no âmbito do STF e os fundamentos constitucionais que lhes emprestam força para justificar as decisões interpretativas. Ao final, o trabalho propõe diretrizes materiais de preferência argumentativa, de tal modo a viabilizar algum controle sobre a interpretação dos dispositivos constitucionais responsáveis por limitar o poder tributário estatal. / This dissertation examines the interpretation of constitutional provisions that assign tax power to federal entities (Union, States, Federal District and Municipalities). These normative statements constitute the raw material from which the interpreter reconstructs the so-called "tax competence rules": norms that predetermine what can be subject to discipline by the infraconstitutional legislator to create taxes. The present work has two purposes. On one hand, it aims to analyze the question of "how" meaning is assigned to these provisions. In this sense, it deals with issues related to the theory of interpretation, the operations performed by the interpreters and the limits of interpretive activity. On the other hand, it sets out to examine the question of "why" the assigned meaning is the correct one, and not another. That is, why meaning "X" - and not meaning "Y" or "Z" - should be considered the best interpretation of a certain constitutional expression used to set limits on the power to tax? To answer this question, this work investigates the arguments used by the Brazilian Supreme Court (STF) and the constitutional foundations that give them strength to justify interpretive decisions. Ultimately, this work proposes material guidelines of argumentative preference, in order to allow some control over the interpretation of constitutional provisions responsible for limiting the state tax power.