An example of an article

UDC 162.6

V.L. Babyuk, Рostgraduate Student


Abstract. (1500-2000 characters with spaces, which include the following items)

Urgency of the research. Investigation of argument evaluation is important for the contemporary argumentation theory because of the lack of a universal approach to understanding the criteria, which can be a guide for such evaluation.

Target setting. It is necessary to find out which of the argument evaluation criteria proposed in different approaches are more universal and take into account the peculiarities of argumentative reasoning operating in real discourse.

Actual scientific researches and issues analysis. Representatives of informal logic, formal dialectics, pragma-dialectics and rhetorical approach work on the problem of argument evaluation criteria. In particular, D. Allen, E. Blair, P. Bondy, J. Freeman, T. Govier, Ch.Hamblin, D. Hitchcock, R. Johnson, R. Pinto, C. Tindale, D. Walton.

Uninvestigated parts of general matters defining. The key role of informal model of argument evaluation is indisputable today. But the reasons which have led to this status were left out of the scientists` attention.

The research objective. The purpose of the article is to found out why the informal model of evaluation has become classical for the argumentation theory.

The statement of basic materials. It is carried out a comparative analysis of argument evaluation models under consideration. It is revealed that understanding of the argumentation is common to them. It has been found that the relevance and acceptability criteria are presented in both evaluation models but in different formulations. At the same time, the sufficiency criterion is not explicated enough in the dialectical model.

Conclusions. Ch. Hamblin’s criteria are inferior to the informal in the pragmatic aspect: convenience, versatility and clarity. This and the historical context could have been the reason of becoming informal criteria key to the theory of argument.

Keywords: argumentation theory, argument evaluation, informal logic, formal dialectics, RAS-model.


Relevance of the research topic;

Formulation of the problem;

Analysis of recent research and publications;

Highlighting the unexplored parts of a common problem;

Formulation of the problem;

Presentation of the main material (split into subsection is possible)

Conclusions according to the article;



1. Dmytryev, A. V. (2000). Konflyktolohyia [Conflictology]. Moscow: Hardaryky [in Russian].

2. Slovar konflyktoloha [Dictionary of the conflictologist]. (n.d.). www.vokabula.rf. Retrieved from //http://www.vokabula.rf/ slovary/ slovar-konflyktoloha [in Russian].

3. Dyahnostyka sotsyalnoi napriazhennosty v obshchestve: rehyonalnyi aspekt [Diagnosis of social tension in society: the regional dimension]. (2002). Stavropol: Servysshkola [in Russian].

4. Vladyko, O. (n.d.). Hotovnist naselennia Ukrainy do sotsialnoho protestu [The readiness of the Ukrainian population for social protest]. Retrieved from http://www. 16-vladiko.pdf [in Ukrainian].

5. Syry, Ye. V., Nakhabych, M. A. (2016). Sotsyolohycheskyi portret vneelytnykh aktorov sotsyalnykh transformatsyi v Ukraine [Sociological portrait of non-elite actors of social transformations in Ukraine]. East European Scientific Journal, 5 (9), 68-76 [in Russian].

6. Siryi, Ye. V. (2016). Doslidzhennia sotsialnoi napruzhenosti v ukrainskomu transformatsiinomu sotsiumi [Research of social tension in the Ukrainian transformational society]. Proceeding from IV International Scientific and Practical Conference: Aktualni pytannia, problemy ta perspektyvy rozvytku humanitarnoho znannia u suchasnomu informatsiinomu prostori: natsionalnyi ta internatsionalnyi aspekty – Topical Issues, Problems and Prospects for the Development of Humanities in the Modern Information Space: National and International Aspects. (pp. 193-196). Rubizhne: EUNU [in Ukrainian].

7. Siryi, Ye. V. (2016). Teoretychni ta metodolohichni zasady systemnoho analizu ta pobudovy kontseptualnoi modeli sotsialnoi napruzhenosti [Theoretical and methodological principles of system analysis and construction of a conceptual model of social tension]. Visnyk Odeskoho natsionalnoho universytetu: sotsiolohiia i politychni nauky – Bulletin of the Odessa National University: Sociology and Political Science, (26), 49-60 [in Ukrainian].

Received 10.02.2021

Bibliographic description for citation:

Babyuk V.L.  Criteria of argument evaluation: informal logic versus formal dialectics  / V.L. Babyuk  // EIJ. Scientific Journal of Emotional Intelligence. –  2021.  – № 1 (1) . – С.