This paper presents a formal model of dialectical argument strength in terms of the number of ways in which an argument can be successfully attacked in expansions of an abstract argumentation framework. First a model is proposed that is abstract but designed to avoid overly limiting assumptions on instantiations or dialogue contexts. It is then shown that most principles for argument strength proposed in the literature fail to hold for the proposed notions of dialectical strength, which clarifies the rational foundations of these principles and highlights the importance of distinguishing between kinds of argument strength, in particular logical, dialectical and rhetorical argument strength. The abstract model is then instantiated with to test the claim that it does not make overly limiting assumptions on the structure of arguments and the nature of their relations.

中文翻译：

---

对辩证论证强度的抽象和结构化描述


本文提出了辩证论证强度的形式模型，即在抽象论证框架的扩展中可以成功攻击论证的方式数量。首先提出了一个抽象的模型，但旨在避免对实例化或对话上下文的过度限制假设。然后表明，文献中提出的大多数论证强度原则无法适用于所提出的辩证强度概念，这澄清了这些原则的理性基础，并强调了区分各种论证强度的重要性，特别是逻辑论证强度、辩证论证强度。和修辞论证的力量。然后将抽象模型实例化，以测试其不会对论证结构及其关系的性质做出过度限制性假设的主张。