Witness Impeachment in Cross-Examination Using Ad Hominem Argumentation

Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric 55 (1):93-114 (2018)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This paper combines methods of argumentation theory and artificial intelligence to extend existing work on the dialectical structure of crossexamination. The existing method used conflict diagrams to search for inconsistent statements in the testimony of a witness. This paper extends the method by using the inconsistency of commitments to draw an inference by the ad hominem argumentation scheme to the conclusion that the testimony is unreliable because of the bad ethical character for veracity of the witness.

Categories

Add categories

Keywords

Reprint years

DOI

10.2478/slgr-2018-0030

Other Versions

reprint Walton, Douglas (2018) "Witness impeachment in cross-examination using "ad hominem" argumentation". In Hinton, Martin, Koszowy, Marcin, The philosophy of argumentation, pp. : University of Białystok (2018)

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 101,505

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

My notes

Similar books and articles

Witness testimony evidence: argumentation, artificial intelligence, and law.Douglas N. Walton - 2008 - New York: Cambridge University Press.
Witness Testimony Evidence: Argumentation and the Law.Douglas Walton - 2007 - Cambridge University Press.
Argumentation Methods for Artificial Intelligence in Law.Douglas Walton - 2005 - Berlin and Heidelberg: Springer.
Dialectical argumentation with argumentation schemes: An approach to legal logic. [REVIEW]Bart Verheij - 2003 - Artificial Intelligence and Law 11 (2-3):167-195.
Ad Hominem Arguments.Douglas Walton - 1998 - University Alabama Press.
Argument Diagramming in Logic, Artificial Intelligence, and Law.Chris Reed, Douglas Walton & Fabrizio Macagno - 2007 - The Knowledge Engineering Review 22 (1):87-109.
The ad Hominem argument as an informal fallacy.Douglas N. Walton - 1987 - Argumentation 1 (3):317-331.
Walton, Douglas (1998). Ad Hominem Arguments.John Woods - 2001 - Argumentation 15 (4):503-507.
Legal Reasoning and Argumentation.Douglas Walton - 2011 - In Colin Aitken, Amalia Amaya, Kevin D. Ashley, Carla Bagnoli, Giorgio Bongiovanni, Bartosz Brożek, Cristiano Castelfranchi, Samuele Chilovi, Marcello Di Bello, Jaap Hage, Kenneth Einar Himma, Lewis A. Kornhauser, Emiliano Lorini, Fabrizio Macagno, Andrei Marmor, J. J. Moreso, Veronica Rodriguez-Blanco, Antonino Rotolo, Giovanni Sartor, Burkhard Schafer, Chiara Valentini, Bart Verheij, Douglas Walton & Wojciech Załuski (eds.), Handbook of Legal Reasoning and Argumentation. Dordrecht, Netherland: Springer Verlag. pp. 47-75.

Analytics

Added to PP
2018-12-07

Downloads
38 (#595,594)

6 months
8 (#594,873)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Argumentation schemes.Douglas Walton, Chris Reed & Fabrizio Macagno - 2008 - New York: Cambridge University Press. Edited by Chris Reed & Fabrizio Macagno.
Argumentation Schemes.Douglas Walton, Christopher Reed & Fabrizio Macagno - 2008 - Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press. Edited by Chris Reed & Fabrizio Macagno.
Fallacies.C. L. Hamblin - 1970 - Revue Philosophique de la France Et de l'Etranger 160:492-492.

View all 11 references / Add more references