Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Wisconsin--Madison, 1953. / Typescript. Vita. eContent provider-neutral record in process. Description based on print version record. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 139-141).

Akademisk avhandling--Filosofi--Lund, 1979. / Bibliogr. p. 142-144. Index.

No description available.

Den 11 oktober 2011 publicerades en artikel i DN som handlade om äldre- och omsorgsboendet Koppargården. Artikeln blev startskottet till det som skulle bli en omfattande förtroendekris för Carema Care, företaget som driver Koppargården. Den 22 december bad representanter för KKR och Triton, riskkapitalbolagen som äger Carema Care, om ursäkt. I uppsatsen undersöks hur krisen skildras och varför samt vad det är som gör det till en kris som KKR och Triton känner sig nödgade att be om ursäkt för. Det material jag har undersökt i uppsatsen är fyra debattartiklar från Dagens Nyheter och Svenska Dagbladet nätsidor. Genom ideologikritik, som genomförs med hjälp av Toulmins argumentationsmodell och framing, tar jag reda på vilken syn på krisen som kommer fram och möjliga förklaringar till varför det är just den bilden av krisen som skildras av respektive aktör. Det blev snabbt tydligt att detta inte enbart var en fråga som handlade om praktisk vård, utan det allra viktigaste verkade vara driftsformen och hur man skulle kontrollera den genom olika system. En ambivalent syn på en fri marknad och konkurrens blir synlig i argumentationsanalysen. Debattartiklarna är också tydligt värderande, någonting som blir tydligt i framingen. Översikten av debattartikelförfattarnas eventuella intressen visade att de alla hade någonting att vinna på sin egen tolkning av krisen. / Emelie Höög

For my dissertation, I analyze the impact of English philosopher Stephen Toulmin's 1958 The Uses of Argument on philosophy and rhetoric. Because Toulmin holds that arguments must be assessed in relation to their original contexts, I begin by examining the intellectual context surrounding The Uses of Argument. I trace the development of formal, symbolic logic from the latter part of the nineteenth century and into the middle of the twentieth century. I argue that Toulmin was inspired by the work of ordinary language philosophers such as Ludwig Wittgenstein; with The Uses of Argument, Toulmin challenges the mathematical, deductive, and positivistic logics of philosophers such as Rene Descartes and Bertrand Russell. Next, I consider features of The Uses of Argument that are overlooked or misunderstood by critics and reviewers, including Toulmin's discussion of probability, field-dependent and independent aspects of arguments, and epistemological theory.After finding that many of the reviews of Toulmin's work were not as critical as recent scholars of rhetoric have portrayed, I evaluate the various ways philosophers and speech communication scholars have responded to Toulmin's arguments. Before examining composition scholars' uses of Toulmin, I briefly trace the development of argumentation in composition instruction. Then, I evaluate the wide range of reactions to and uses of Toulmin's work by composition scholars.Finally, having examined the intellectual history, the critical reception, and the variety of scholarly applications of The Uses of Argument, I offer my own application of Toulmin's work. I explain that good, "Toulmin-inspired" arguments are (1) contextual, (2) supported, and (3) multi-sided. Using student examples from my freshman composition courses, I demonstrate how students and I have used Toulmin's schema in several stages of the writing process, including invention and revision. I conclude that while Toulmin's work has had a significant impact on argumentation theory and pedagogy, rhetoricians-particularly composition scholars-have not yet fully realized the rhetorical and epistemological implications of The Uses of Argument. / Department of English

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Ohio State University, 2007. / Full text release at OhioLINK's ETD Center delayed at author's request

No description available.

In this study I investigated the interactions of 25 Grade 8 science students as they learned how to construct oral arguments using the Toulmin Argumentation Pattern framework. I collected the data during three recorded small group discussion sessions during a five week Earth Science unit between February and March of 2011. The first session recorded the students’ discussions prior to receiving either argumentation instruction or the science concept instruction. The second session recorded their discussions after receiving an introduction to argumentation and a scaffold, but not concept instruction. During the three weeks preceding the third session, the students received additional argumentation instruction and completed one-third of the Earth Science unit. The results showed the students collectively made more arguments during each subsequent session. The students’ individual arguments showed a correspondence between their purportedly most familiar topics and the most discussed topics. I also found that when students made counter arguments and/or invited or challenged group members to participate, their discussions contained comparatively more argument elements (claims, data and warrants) than discussions containing predominantly collaborative assertions. The key outcome of this study for developing students’ use of the elements of argumentation during classroom discussions was to recognize and incorporate opportunities for the students to tap into their prior-knowledge. To engage students in this process, the results indicate the importance of creating time for discussions relevant to the curriculum and to the students. / Graduate / 0727 / 0279 / 0714 / brianu@uvic.ca

Thesis (M.A.)--Brigham Young University. Dept. of Mathematics Education, 2007. / Includes bibliographical references (p. 54-56).

Tesis doct.--Filos.--Pamplona--Universidad de Navarra, 1972. Titre de soutenance : La obra y la tradición ética de Toulmin. / Bibliogr. p. 811-818 et bibliogr. des oeuvres de S.-E. Toulmin, p. 818-822.