Sentences with phrase «based argumentation»

Dr. Régis Riveret, Professor Dr. Antonino Rotolo, and Professor Dr. Giovanni Sartor have published Probabilistic rule - based argumentation for norm - governed learning agents, forthcoming in Artificial Intelligence and Law.

Whereas the GC primarily relied on EU law to come to the partial annulment, the Court fully based its argumentation on customary international rules of treaty interpretation, applying these rules to the GC's argumentation.

I personally believe that a your responses (as in this post) are not as respectfull and professional as they could be, and I think that with this post you may have actually destroyed a bridge of science - based argumentation which was apparent in the reviews.

We show that although scientists are trained in dealing with uncertainty, there are several psychological and cognitive reasons why scientists may nevertheless be susceptible to uncertainty - based argumentation, even when scientists recognize those arguments as false and are actively rebutting them.

His classroom - based research on critical speaking and listening intersects with his psychometric development of assessments that gauge how students learn science through evidence - based argumentation.

This common analytic rubric assesses argumentative writing within the discipline of history, with a focus on document - based argumentation.

We welcome submissions from academics and students in and outside the University of Oxford, from all disciplines and persuasions, as long as they offer evidence - based argumentation and academic rigour.

The risk of continuing to base the argumentation on emission budgets is that they communicate a false certainty to society and policy makers leading to policies that seem to be based on scientifically derived probabilities, but are really just statements about what is possibly true.

Not exact matches

Types of Moral Argumentation Regarding Homosexuality by Pim Pronk Eerdmans, 350 pages, $ 24.99 paper An interesting book not so much for the position it advances (approval of homosexual relations) as for the claim that any position on homosexuality (or anything else) must be reached on the basis of moral reflection independent of nature, science, or theology.

I think the dynamic at work here is that many Christians have the maturity level to recognize that most of these issues are based on deep seeded presuppositions, and that no amount of argumentation will changed the minds of those entrenched in their unbelief.

I think the dynamic at work here is that many non-believers have the maturity level to recognize that most of these issues are based on deep seeded presuppositions, and that no amount of argumentation will changed the minds of those entrenched in their belief.

So far, I have proposed that many activist evangelicals have really come to hold their social views on the basis of cultural osmosis or legitimate political argumentation.

Intergroup tensions and conflicts are based on hard vested interests, on ancient and newly invented hatreds, and on emotional and ideological needs, none of which is easily influenced by religious sermonizing, let alone by theological argumentation.

And reason and argumentation and evidence (even based on observation) are valued, as it is part of academia.

Rationalistic theologies, such as Charles Hartshorne's, are based largely on a priori reason or rational argumentation, and deem these valuable precisely because they are not particular.

Where his argumentation is based on God's everlastingness, which however — in the absence of the reversal of poles as an argument — remains ill - founded, my argumentation is based on the reversal of God's poles, which is well - founded in Whitehead's metaphysics.

My interpretation, though developed independently, may be seen as a reassertion of Christian's proposal, partly though a stronger argumentation based on the reversal of poles, and mainly by a refutation of the objection made by Leclerc and Ford.

These argumentations are always based on the cost of the actual birth itself, without looking at the price tag of the consequences when things go wrong.

For example, the ELA Standards demand a greater balance between reading informational and literary texts, and stress the use of text - based evidence to support argumentation in writing and speaking.

This performance task is based on Task # 2 for Argumentation / Analysis found in Literacy Design Collaborative's LDC Template Task Collection 2.0.

This performance task is based on Task # 5 for Argumentation / Evaluation found in Literacy Design Collaborative's LDC Template Task Collection 2.0.

A similar form of argument contrasting non-knowledge-based and knowledge - based instructional approaches applies to «argumentation» or «writing» as science learning activities.

The sociocultural approach used, collective argumentation (CA), is based on interactive principles necessary for coordinating student engagement in the discourse of the classroom.

Critical thinking as an academic discipline is based on the rules of formal logic, theory and practice of argumentation, rhetoric and scientific epistemology (a section of philosophy that deals with instruments and limitations of cognitive activity).

Nevertheless, you have to plan your writing and come up with a strong argumentation based on supporting secondary sources.

Argumentation essay should be based on relevant and reliable arguments.

Your argumentation should be based on evidence.

This part involves the development of argumentation and analysis, as well as a justification of your ideas and assumptions on the basis of available data.

Argumentation or evidence you refer to must be based on scientific data and socially - historical practices; while, convictions may be based on prejudice, ignorance of people in the economy and politics, evidentiary visibility.

Sophist argumentation based in a distinct lack of knowledge is not a foundation upon which anyone, especially scientists or professors should base their arguments upon.

In both cases, this is not a debate that will be won or lost on the basis of more information or more effective argumentation.

I realize that «true believers in the CAGW dogma» (in the pseudo-religious sense) are not going to change their minds based on rational argumentation nor will those who are supporting the CAGW dogma for purely political reasons.

Stephen, I'd be more than happy to focus on scientific dialogue, but I don't play games of «this guy sent that guy an email, etc, etc» or taking quotations well out of context as a basis for argumentation.

Within this structure, the details are argueable, but we will at least have a reasonable basis within which such argumentation will take place.

And at the same time, you can't help but learn something about the fine art of argumentation from charts as practiced by the master himself, Steve McIntyre, and refined in his most devoted media outlet, the U.K. based Mail on Sunday.

Based upon your answer, I think all the other argumentation will be moot.

With a reasonable argumentation that also the Land fraction of satellite data is a good indicator of land temperatures, lets look at the «extra heat» seen in the ground based land temperature measurements (mostly from cities and airports).

Paragraphs 5.11 to 5.14 assesses the argumentation on the basis of Article 70 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT) and Article 20 TFEU.

Judges are not yet very well versed in intellectual property, and hence, they are pretty susceptible to argumentation based on good / bad faith and general honesty.

The above arguments are based upon the constitutional law doctrine of «structural argumentation» (see: Robin M. Elliott, «References, Structural Argumentation and the Organizing Principles of Canada's Constitution» (2000), 80 Canadian Bar Review 67, and decisions such as the, Reference Re Manitoba Language Rights, [1985] 1 S.C.R. 721, [1985] S.C.J. No. 36, the, Reference Re Secession of Québec, [1999] S.C.J. No. 4, [1998] 2 SCR 217, and the, Reference re Remuneration of Judges, [1997] S.C.J. No. 75, [1997] 3 S.C.R. 3, to argue that the need for access to the rule of law, and to constitutional rights and freedoms, dictate that law societies in Canada can not enforce a monopoly over the provision of legal services that enables their members to charge fees of whatever size argumentation» (see: Robin M. Elliott, «References, Structural Argumentation and the Organizing Principles of Canada's Constitution» (2000), 80 Canadian Bar Review 67, and decisions such as the, Reference Re Manitoba Language Rights, [1985] 1 S.C.R. 721, [1985] S.C.J. No. 36, the, Reference Re Secession of Québec, [1999] S.C.J. No. 4, [1998] 2 SCR 217, and the, Reference re Remuneration of Judges, [1997] S.C.J. No. 75, [1997] 3 S.C.R. 3, to argue that the need for access to the rule of law, and to constitutional rights and freedoms, dictate that law societies in Canada can not enforce a monopoly over the provision of legal services that enables their members to charge fees of whatever size Argumentation and the Organizing Principles of Canada's Constitution» (2000), 80 Canadian Bar Review 67, and decisions such as the, Reference Re Manitoba Language Rights, [1985] 1 S.C.R. 721, [1985] S.C.J. No. 36, the, Reference Re Secession of Québec, [1999] S.C.J. No. 4, [1998] 2 SCR 217, and the, Reference re Remuneration of Judges, [1997] S.C.J. No. 75, [1997] 3 S.C.R. 3, to argue that the need for access to the rule of law, and to constitutional rights and freedoms, dictate that law societies in Canada can not enforce a monopoly over the provision of legal services that enables their members to charge fees of whatever size they see fit.

TAGS: Legal informatics conferences; Legal argumentation systems; Legal argument systems; Legal rhetoric; Legal negotiation systems; Negotiation systems; Legal multi agent systems; Legal agent based systems; Artifical intelligence and law conferences.

TAGS: Burden of proof; Criminal law information systems; Criminal procedure information systems; Defeasible reasoning; Defeasible reasoning in law; Evidence and legal reasoning; Evidence information systems; Evidentiary decisionmaking; Evidentiary decisions; Evidentiary reasoning; Gender and evidentiary reasoning; Gender and legal reasoning; Inference and legal evidence; Inference in law; Inference in legal information systems; Inference in legal reasoning; Legal argument; Legal argumentation; Legal decisionmaking; Legal defeasible reasoning; Legal evidence; Legal evidence information systems; Legal inference; Legal logic; Legal reasoning in the process of proof; Legal statistical evidence; Modeling burdens of proof; Narrative based legal reasoning; Narrative in legal evidence; Process of proof in law; Schemes in legal narrative analysis; Statistical evidence in law; Legal informatics monographs; Legal informatics article collections.

Innovative methods based on improvisational theater help teachers better support mathematical argumentation, one of the Common Core practice standards.