From the about page : AGORA -net is a Computer-Supported Collaborative Argument Visualization ( CSCAV ) tool. An argument is defined here as a set of statements—a claim and one or more reasons—where the reasons jointly provide support for the claim, or are at least meant to support the claim. AGORA -net can be used for free by everybody. The software provides step-by-step guidance to construct arguments and networks of arguments and counter-arguments. The software is collaborative in the sense that users can work simultaneously on the same argument map via an internet connection, be it in face-to-face communication or online. They can add arguments and objections to statements, as well as references, links to resources, comments, definitions, and friendly amendments. The design of an AGORA -net argument map is based on the consideration that the main point of arguing is to provide a justification for a claim, a thesis, or a recommendation. Thus, these statements are always located on the top left of your screen. By providing reasons for your claim, you work to the right. Of course, any map can be read from any direction. Here is an example AGORA argument on the topic of millennial voting: Existing public AGORA arguments can be found in their index divided into topics. If a user is logged in, they are able to contribute to existing arguments as well as view their maps, projects, and contributions. There is also a search tool to parse through existing arguments. Below is a 5-minute introductory video on constructing an AGORA argument: Additional instructions on how to use AGORA can be found on their What You Should Know Before You Start page. AGORA -net is available in English, Russian, German, and Spanish. AGORA -net was conceptualized and designed by Michael Hoffmann, Director of the Philosophy Program in the School of Public Policy at the Georgia Institute of Technology, and funded by the United States-Russia Program of FIPSE , the Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary Education, and U.S. Department of Education (Grant P116S100006). Collaborators include Bauman Moscow State Technical University (2010-2012) and the Institute of Philosophy in the Russian Academy of Science (2012 onwards).
Tools (9)
Argüman is an open source project developed by the community for argument analysis. Argument mapping – producing “boxes and arrows” diagrams of reasoning – is the primary mode for promoting critical thinking on the platform. Users may begin a new argument thread by posting a contention, citing the origin of the discourse and providing sources supporting the argument. For each contested statement, participants may also add one of three types of premises: but (objection), because (reason in support), and however (additional conditions). Sources associated with these premises can also be linked. Participants may support premises, attach a premise to an existing one, or report the fallacy of a premise. Arguments are assigned objection percentages or support ratings based on these votes. Arguments can be classified into channels such as politics, religion, programming, drugs, and animals (among many more). Argument mapping is available in English, Turkish, Traditional Chinese, and French. Argüman is an open source project. The source code is available on Github . Argüman is developed by a core world-wide team and developers.
bCisive is a Windows application allowing for a visual representation of group decisions and deliberations. From their product overview : bMaps let you organise all your thoughts and information in one place when presenting your ideas or thinking through a decision. Lay out the question, the options, their pros and cons, and your arguments for and against. Add links to supporting documents, websites and evidence for your claims. A bMap’s visual structure makes your reasoning clear and explicit, helping you analyse the problem more rigorously. Assumptions and unsupported claims are obvious, and it’s easier to spot gaps in your thinking and even new options for consideration. Be confident that you’ve addressed all relevant issues and made the best decision or proposal. For more information, visit bCisive’s tutorial pages . bCisive also has an online version, bCisive Online . To learn about the similarities and differences between the two, see this side-by-side comparison . bCisive is developed by ReasoningLab based in Amsterdam, Netherlands.
bCisive Online is an online version of the Windows application bCisive and creates visual representation of group decisions and deliberations. In addition to the features of bCisive listed below, its online iteration is accessible through a web browser and provides an online space for collaborators. From their product overview : bMaps let you organise all your thoughts and information in one place when presenting your ideas or thinking through a decision. Lay out the question, the options, their pros and cons, and your arguments for and against. Add links to supporting documents, websites and evidence for your claims. A bMap’s visual structure makes your reasoning clear and explicit, helping you analyse the problem more rigorously. Assumptions and unsupported claims are obvious, and it’s easier to spot gaps in your thinking and even new options for consideration. Be confident that you’ve addressed all relevant issues and made the best decision or proposal. For more usage information, view bCisive Online’s video tutorial . For information comparing bCisive and bCisive Online, see their side-by-side comparison . bCisive is developed by ReasoningLab based in Amsterdam, Netherlands.
From the about page : Compendium is a software tool providing a flexible visual interface for managing the connections between information and ideas. It places few constraints on how you organise material, though many have found that it provides support for structured working for instance, following a methodology or modelling technique. Our own particular interest is in visualizing the connections between people, ideas and information at multiple levels, in mapping discussions and debates, and what skills are needed to do so in a participatory manner that engages all stakeholders. Many people use Compendium to manage their personal digital information resources, since you can drag+drop in any document, website, email, image, etc, organise them visually, and then connect ideas, arguments and decisions to these. Compendium thus becomes the ‘glue’ that allows you to pool and make sense of disparate material that would otherwise remain fragmented in different software applications. You can assign your own keyword ‘tags’ to these elements (icons), create your own palettes of icons that have special meanings, overlay maps on top of background images, and place/edit a given icon in many different places at once: things don’t always fit neatly into just one box in real life. Extending Compendium’s support for personal sensemaking, we have a particular interest in what we term collective sensemaking, and have developed a technique called Dialogue Mapping, and its extension, Conversational Modelling. Our experiences with these techniques for capturing and managing — often in real time and under pressure — […] lead us to claim that Compendium offers innovative strategies for tackling some of the key challenges in managing knowledge and making meaning: * improving communication between disparate communities tackling ill-structured problems * real time capture and integration of hybrid material (both predictable/ formal, and unexpected/informal) into a reusable group memory * transforming the resulting resource into the right representational formats for different stakeholders. There are three versions of the Compendium tool: CompendiumLD (Learning Design): A version providing a flexible visual interface to support educators map out a Learning Design in order to see the objectives and student/tutor/resource activity flows. CompendiumDS (Design Studio): A version for the award winning OU module Design thinking: creativity for the 21st century providing a radically stripped down user interface for students to map design concepts in Compendium, and tutors to comment on them. CompendiumCN (CogNexus Institute): A version optimized for very large data sets and collaborative mapping via locally networked users on an intranet. Developed to support CogNexus’ large client organizations for whom Compendium is a key tool.
Debategraph is a browser-based web application for debate mapping. It is built on the perception that: complex debates can be mapped comprehensively, with all of the pertinent issues, positions, arguments, and evidence represented in a transparent and coherent visual structure; the web can be used to externalise and open up this process to anyone interested in contributing to, evaluating, or simply exploring the maps; and, collaborative, visual mapping of this kind can help individuals, organizations and networks make sense of (and act in) the world more efficiently and effectively. In essence, debate mapping involves three steps: breaking down the subject debated into meaningful parts; identifying the relationships between those parts; and, presenting the parts and their relationships visually. To find out more, view Debategraph’s tutorial video . Debategraph was founded and developed by Peter Baldwin and David Price, who are based in Sydney, Australia and Somerset, UK, respectively.
From the How it works page: [OnlineTownhalls is a] Web-based application that can help you engage thousands of stakeholders in a single conversation to discuss any of our organization’s toughest problems. […] [OnlineTownhalls] uses conversation mapping to visualize the pros and cons of competing ideas. The steps to the OnlineTownhalls process are: Set the Table : Propose the topic and make a handful of statements that viewers can choose to agree or disagree with. Invite Your Guests : Stakeholders and constituents can spread the word through blog embedding, email, and Twitter. Sip Coffee, Listen, & Watch : As participants join, the map grows larger and larger. Now Engage! : Ask questions or weigh in on a conversation. Explain your rationale on complex decisions. It’s Easy : Visualize the common ground. Summarize the conversation, and plan your next discussion. Steadily build momentum to resolve controversial issues. Features of OnlineTownhalls include creating trusted communication networks, aggregating citizen ideas and input, using private sector expertise, receiving balanced information from stakeholders of all sides, finding each sides’ strongest ideas, and reaching large audiences. More information can be found on the tool’s features page . OnlineTownhalls is developed by AthenaBridge based in Charlottesville, VA (US) and Washington, DC (US).
From the website : Developed from Reason!Able, Rationale™ accelerates the development of rigorous critical thinking skills by providing a visual framework to organise information, structure reasoning and evaluate evidence. When this is complete, Rationale provides export tools to assist your communication and presentation of your analysis and conclusions. For example, if you need to consider the pros and cons of an issue, weigh up evidence, evaluate and analyse arguments, then Rationale will help you make your case and present it with structure and clarity. Rationale supersedes the previously available Reason!able product.
Reason!Able was a software for reasoning developed by Melbourne, Australia-based Austhink Software ( http://austhink.com ) The tool has meanwhile been superseded by Rationale . An old version of the original website is still available on archive.org .