Department of Psychological Sciences, Birkbeck College, University of London, London, UK.
Trends Cogn Sci. 2020 May;24(5):363-374. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2020.01.004. Epub 2020 Mar 10.
The idea of resolving dispute through the exchange of arguments and reasons has been central to society for millennia. We exchange arguments as a way of getting at the truth in contexts as diverse as science, the court room, and our everyday lives. In democracies, political decisions should be negotiated through argument, not deception, or even worse, brute force. If argument is to lead to the truth or to good decisions, then some arguments must be better than others and 'argument strength' must have some meaningful connection with truth. Can argument strength be measured in a way that tracks an objective relationship with truth and not just mere persuasiveness? This article describes recent developments in providing such measures.
通过论点和论据的交流来解决争端的想法在社会中已经存在了几千年。我们在科学、法庭和日常生活等各种情况下通过交流论点来探究真理。在民主国家，政治决策应该通过辩论来协商，而不是欺骗，甚至更糟糕的是，使用暴力。如果论点要通向真理或做出好的决策，那么有些论点必须比其他论点更好，并且“论点的力度”必须与真理有某种有意义的联系。论点的力度能否以一种与真理而不仅仅是说服力有客观关系的方式来衡量？本文描述了在提供这种衡量方法方面的最新进展。
