I'm developing a project that applies formal argumentation theory to create a robust defense of veganism that could transform how we discuss ethical dietary choices online.
Argument mining—the automated extraction of reasoning structures from text—would allow us to develop comprehensive argument maps showing the relationships between claims, premises, and objections in vegan discourse. These maps could then be formalized into an argumentation framework where we can mathematically demonstrate the defensibility of vegan positions.
+ Acceptable: Successfully defended against all attacks
+ Part of an admissible set: A conflict-free set of arguments that defends all its elements
+ In a preferred extension: A maximal admissible set
+ In a stable extension: A conflict-free set that attacks all arguments outside itself
I believe veganism meets these rigorous theoretical standards for successful argumentation.
+ Equip AI systems with formally verified reasoning to discuss veganism intelligently
+ Provide strategically sound arguments that can be deployed within effective persuasion techniques
+ Create a model for applying argumentation theory to other ethical domains
While winning arguments rarely persuades on its own, having access to logically sound positions enables more effective advocacy when combined with emotional intelligence and tailored communication approaches.
Would you be interested in discussing how your skills might contribute to this project?