Argdown - Simple syntax for complex argumentation

DanielaChM

Hi!
I found this resource (Argdown) is a syntax for building arguments and thought it would be very cool that The archive could support it.

They even share a commandline tool and an extension for VSCode.

What do you think?

Cheers

Sociopoetic

As someone who is still learning a lot of these tools for plain text, but does a fair amount of argument mapping, I think this would be a great tool to integrate with the Archive.

ctietze

This looks like a real fun visualization language to use. I'd love to see someone test this in practice. You cannot possibly map all arguments in any branch of philosophy with that, because indentation will get out of hand eventually, but to get an overview, this looks nice!

Edit: I take this back, there's other mechanisms to nest sub-argumentations: https://argdown.org/#_2-premise-conclusion-structures

DanielaChM

@ctietze said:
This looks like a real fun visualization language to use. I'd love to see someone test this in practice. You cannot possibly map all arguments in any branch of philosophy with that, because indentation will get out of hand eventually, but to get an overview, this looks nice!

Edit: I take this back, there's other mechanisms to nest sub-argumentations: https://argdown.org/#_2-premise-conclusion-structures

Oh yes, I think they try to incorporate complex arguments, the creators are a team of philosophers, they started with Argunet, and then move on to Argdown.

Sociopoetic

I recognize the name of one of the creators of Argunet; he wrote the Argdown plugin for Atom, too.

Sascha

I think the scaling is wrong since they are using whole arguments as items. I'd rather have a language that uses statements as items. Or even use predicate logic.

I doubt the validity of the markup if the argumentation gets to complex