{"text_format":"2","workbook":"xls","n_sheets":1,"sheets":["report2"],"not_rendered":{"charts":0,"images":0,"macros":0,"external_links":1,"defined_names":2,"comments":0,"pivot_tables":0},"unopened":[],"bounds":{"document_bytes":16777216,"sheet_cells":100000,"run_cost":"one","rows_first":2000,"rows_last":500,"rows_between":2000,"halvings":0,"cell_chars":16384,"cell_head_chars":4096},"cells_cut":0,"cells_raw":0,"read":"whole","date_system":"1900","formulas":"cached_only"}

{"sheet":"report2","index":0,"n_rows":36,"n_cols":5,"rows_kept":36,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[0,2,0,3],[0,4,0,5],[1,2,1,3],[1,4,1,5],[2,2,2,3],[2,4,2,5],[3,2,3,3],[4,2,4,3],[5,2,5,3],[6,2,6,3],[7,2,7,3],[8,2,8,3],[10,2,10,3],[10,4,10,5],[11,2,11,3],[11,4,11,5],[12,2,12,3],[12,4,12,5],[13,2,13,3],[14,2,14,3],[17,2,17,3],[18,2,18,3],[19,2,19,3],[20,2,20,3],[21,2,21,3],[22,2,22,3],[24,2,24,3],[25,2,25,3],[29,2,29,3]],"flags":["formulas_cached_only"]}
[null,"1.","Record Nr.",null,"UNISALENTO991000651039707536"]
[null,null,"Autore",null,"De Giorgi, Letizia"]
[null,null,"Titolo",null,"Alcuni risultati recenti nella teoria degli spazi di Fréchet. Tesi di laurea / laureanda Letizia De Giorgi ; relat. Vincenzo Bruno Moscatelli"]
[null,null,"Pubbl/distr/stampa",null,"Lecce : Università degli studi. Facoltà di Scienze. Corso di laurea in Matematica, a.a. 1993-94"]
[null,null,"Classificazione",null,"AMS 46A04"]
[null,null,"Disciplina",null,"515.7"]
[null,null,"Soggetti",null,"Locally convex Fréchet spaces"]
[null,null,"Lingua di pubblicazione",null,"Italiano"]
[null,null,"Formato",null,"Materiale a stampa"]
[null,null,null,"Livello bibliografico","Monografia"]
[null,"2.","Record Nr.",null,"UNINA9910973818403321"]
[null,null,"Autore",null,"Walton Douglas N"]
[null,null,"Titolo",null,"Informal fallacies : towards a theory of argument criticisms / / Douglas N. Walton"]
[null,null,"Pubbl/distr/stampa",null,"Amsterdam ; ; Philadelphia, : J. Benjamins Pub. Co., 1987"]
[null,null,"ISBN",null,"1-283-35890-5"]
[{"$nulls":4},"9786613358905"]
[{"$nulls":4},"90-272-7890-3"]
[null,null,"Edizione",null,"[1st ed.]"]
[null,null,"Descrizione fisica",null,"1 online resource  (x, 336 pages)"]
[null,null,"Collana",null,"Pragmatics & beyond companion series ; ; 4"]
[null,null,"Classificazione",null,"CC 2600"]
[null,null,"Disciplina",null,"165"]
[null,null,"Soggetti",null,"Fallacies (Logic)"]
[{"$nulls":4},"Logic"]
[null,null,"Lingua di pubblicazione",null,"Inglese"]
[null,null,"Formato",null,"Materiale a stampa"]
[null,null,null,"Livello bibliografico","Monografia"]
[null,null,null,"Note generali","Description based upon print version of record."]
[null,null,null,"Nota di bibliografia","Includes bibliography and indexes."]
[null,null,"Nota di contenuto",null,"INFORMAL FALLACIES Towards a Theory of Argument Criticisms; Editorial page; Title page; Copyright page; Acknowledgements; Table of contents; CHAPTER 1: A NEW MODEL OF ARGUMENT; 1. Introduction to the Fallacies; 2. Some More Fallacies; 3. Fallacies Combined in Realistic Dialogues; 4. What is an Argument?; 5. Criticism as Challenge and Response; 6. Basic Categories of Argument Study; NOTES; CHAPTER TWO: HOT RHETORIC AND ARGUMENT; 1. Appeals to Popular Sentiment; 2. Appeals to Force; 3. Appeals to Pity; 4. Overly Personal Argumentation; 5. The Rhetorical Debate"]
[{"$nulls":4},"6. Case Study: Parliamentary Debate 1. THE ECONOMY MEASURES TO MAINTAIN EMPLOYMENT; 2. BANKS AND BANKING; 7. Conclusion; NOTES; CHAPTER 3: THE LOGIC OF PROPOSITIONS; 1. Deductive Validity; 2. Formal Logic; 3. Classical Propositional Calculus; 4. Applying Deductive Logic to Arguments; 5. Invalidity and Fallaciousness; 6. Relevance and Validit; 7. Subject-Matter Relatedness; 8. Relatedness Logic; 9. Semantics and Pragmatics; 10. What is a Fallacy?; NOTES; CHAPTER 4: LOGICAL DIALOGUE-GAMES; 1. Different Approaches to Formal Dialogues; 2. The Ad Ignorantiam Fallacy; 3. Fallacies of Question-Asking"]
[{"$nulls":4},"4. The Fallacy of Many Questions 5. Demanding Direct Answers to Questions; 6. Misconception of Refutation; 7. Case Studies of Political Debates; 8. A Game with Dark-Side Commitments; NOTES; CHAPTER 5: ENTHYMEMES; 1. The Tradition of Enthymemes; 2. The Objectives of "]
[{"$nulls":4},"Dialogue; 3. Veiled Commitment-Sets; 4. Strategy and Plausibility; 5. The Problem Resolved; 6. Order of the Premisses; 7. Multiple Premisses in Complex Arguments; NOTE; CHAPTER 6: LONGER SEQUENCES OF ARGUMENTATION; 1. Sequences of Argumentation; 2. Graphs of Arguments; 3. Case Study: Argument on Sex Education"]
[{"$nulls":4},"4. Case Study: Circular Argumentation 5. Plausibility Conditions on Arguments; 6. The Missing Links; 7. Conclusions on Circular Arguments; NOTES; CHAPTER 7: FALLACIOUS ARGUMENTS FROM AUTHORITY; 1. How Appeals to Authority Can Go Wrong; 2. Plausible Argument; 3. Where Experts Disagree; 4. Expertise and Legal Dialogue; 5. Dialogue and Expertise; 6. Conclusions; NOTE; CHAPTER 8: VARIOUS FALLACIES; 1. Inductive Fallacies; 2. Deductive and Inductive Arguments; 3. Post Hoc Arguments; 4. Slippery Slope; 5. Equivocation; 6. Amphiboly; 7. Composition and Division"]
[{"$nulls":4},"CHAPTER 9: ARGUMENTS AGAINST THE PERSON 1. Poisoning the Well; 2. The Sportsman's Rejoinder; 3. Evaluating Ad Hominem Disputations; 4. Four Types of Circumstantial Ad Hominem; 5. Rhetorical Context of Ad Hominem Attacks; 6. Positional Defensibility; 7. Conclusion; NOTES; CHAPTER 10: EQUIVOCATION; 1. What is Equivocation?; 2. Vagueness and Criticisms of Equivocality; 3. The Problem of Subtle Equivocations; 4. Deep Deception and Equivocal Dialogue; 5. Many-Valued Logic for Equivocators; 6. Priest's System LP; 7. Applying LP to the Fallacy of Equivocation; 8. R-Mingle as a Logic for Equivocators; 9. RM and Equivocation"]
[null,null,null,"Sommario/riassunto","The basic question of this monograph is: how should we go about judging arguments to be reasonable or unreasonable? Our concern will be with argument in a broad sense, with realistic arguments in natural language. The basic object will be to engage in a normative study of determining what factors, standards, or procedures should be adopted or appealed to in evaluating an argument as \"good,\" \"not-so-good,\" \"open to criticism,\" \"fallacious,\" and so forth. Hence our primary concern will be with the problems of how to criticize an argument, and when a criticism is reasonably justified."]