Brian Larson
rhetoricked@mastodon.lawprofs.org
NYT article on ChatGPT behind paywall

Good take on courses students should take to be more than/better than

HT @MyLegalWriting@Twitter.com

1 day ago
rhetoricked shared a status by ReginaldOhLaw
ReginaldOhLaw
ReginaldOhLaw@mastodon.lawprofs.org

Is teaching Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion a form of indoctrination? For example, is teaching black feminism in an AP African American Studies course indoctrination?

No.

*Banning* DEI is indoctrination, however.

Indoctrination is defined as forcing students to absorb/internalize a belief or narrative uncritically and without question.

Banning DEI is calculated to do exactly that.

Thread

3 days ago
Brian Larson
rhetoricked@mastodon.lawprofs.org

@lexpedite Your explanation is helpful. I'll think about it some more!

3 days ago
Brian Larson
rhetoricked@mastodon.lawprofs.org

@lexpedite After just a quick glance (on vacation here), I wonder how your code maps (or not) onto argumentation mapping tools (eg Rationale, ArgDown, Arucaria, etc.).

4 days ago
rhetoricked shared a status by lexpedite
Jason Morris
lexpedite@law.builders

So I've got this auto-generating on the basis of responses from the Blawx reasoner. Instead of a tree, the explanation is a list of paragraphs. Each paragraph is a conclusion and the factors that allowed it to be inferred. Each factor is a button that will show you how that factor was found, or hide the corresponding paragraph below if it is already shown.

Here's my thinking, let me know if it makes sense.... 1/

5 days ago
rhetoricked shared a status by jbe
JB Emmons
jbe@esq.social

Hey y'all, I just switched instances, so here's an .

I'm an native living in Metro . I have a decade's experience in civil litigation in the US, currently jumping through hoops to get licensed to practice in . I post about & issues, learning Canadian law, , , and all sorts of nerdy things.

My old handle (IntlLawGnome) was a silly inside joke with my wife from back when no one else was on Mastodon. I'm going for more boring now!

January 28, 2023
rhetoricked shared a status by dustinstoltz
Dᴜsᴛɪɴ Sᴛᴏʟᴛᴢ :tardis:
dustinstoltz@fediscience.org

Around 2018, @mtaylor_soc (who just joined Mastodon!) and I started working on a simple way to measure concept engagement in texts using word embedding models. Fast forward to now, and that tool---Concept Mover's Distance, or CMD---has been used in some fantastic research. A 🧵on some of that work: (1/N)

And, my first thread on this beast!

@rstats @sociology

November 19, 2022
rhetoricked shared a status by florey
Katherine Florey
florey@mastodon.lawprofs.org

Been on the for a couple of weeks now (and even succeeded in switching instances!), so it's finally time for an . Yes, I came here from Twitter like everyone else, but as a Gen Xer, I'm finding this a pleasant throwback to the slightly glitchy but earnest Internet spaces of the 90s/early 2000s. I'm a law prof with extremely eclectic interests: conflicts, civ pro, public health, fed courts, federal Indian law. Also enjoy reading novels, trying to improve my German.

November 22, 2022
rhetoricked shared a status by schuklenk
Udo Schuklenk
schuklenk@aus.social

Reviewer 2 said ‘yes’, all is forgiven!

January 24, 2023
rhetoricked shared a status by jeremy
Jeremy Foote
jeremy@hci.social

@cmhenry_

We (@communitydata) have been working on similar questions, but from more of an ecology lens than an econ lens.

For example, I have a few papers on why people start new wikis and @sohw and I have a paper on why people participate in small communities.

@groceryheist has been working on theories of commensalism between online spaces.

January 26, 2023
Brian Larson
rhetoricked@mastodon.lawprofs.org

Reviewer #1 called the paper “clever and ambitious” before skewering us on a series of issues that we remedied before a second round of peer review; they accepted the second version without further requirements. The paper seems less clever and ambitious to me now, but we’ve made more precise claims and more carefully supported them. Sadly, I don’t have a pre-print to share online, but ask if you want one privately. I hope to see the issue out later this year! 6/6

January 27, 2023
Brian Larson
rhetoricked@mastodon.lawprofs.org

Our definition addresses some questions arising from existing argument-scheme definitions. For example, using our data, we show that a minimally well formed instance of this type of argument does not shift any conventional burden from the proponent of the argument to its skeptics. Instead, we speculate that an argument proponent may be able to shift a burden by saturating the argument with propositions in the critical framework to one extent or another. 5/6

January 27, 2023
Brian Larson
rhetoricked@mastodon.lawprofs.org

We distinguish this practical normativity from rationally or universally normative assessment, usually from outside the argumentative context. Thus, practical norms in an argument scheme may still be subject to rational critique, and the scheme avoids the is/ought fallacy. We ground our position in an empirical study of US district court opinions and the lawyers’ briefs that led to them, instantiating our definition of argument scheme in the “argument for classification by precedent.” 4/6

January 27, 2023
Brian Larson
rhetoricked@mastodon.lawprofs.org

Our article proposes a definition of “argument scheme” focused on describing argumentative performances and normative assessments occurring in an argumentative context, the social context in which the scheme arises. A premise-and-conclusion structure identifies the typical instantiation of an argument in the argumentative context, and a critical framework describes a set of normative assessments available to participants in the context, what we call practically normative assessments. 3/6

January 27, 2023
Brian Larson
rhetoricked@mastodon.lawprofs.org

I wrote this piece with David Morrison (former star student and now collaborator) for the special issue of _Argumentation_ on “Norms of Public Argumentation.” Special issue is edited by Jan Albert van Laar and Frank Zenker as part of the APPLY COST action (publicpolicyargument.eu/, funded by the EU). I’m also pleased that the APPLY WG2 “state of the art” paper on norms of argumentation (on which I was a contributing author) will appear in the issue. 2/6

January 27, 2023
Brian Larson
rhetoricked@mastodon.lawprofs.org

The journal _Argumentation_ has accepted “Reconceiving Argument Schemes as Descriptive and Practically Normative.” This thread summarizes our revision of work of et al. I argue here (and elsewhere) that are essential for making sense of and . 1/6

(Pinned profile post has hashtag explainer)






January 27, 2023
rhetoricked shared a status by andrewmilward
Andrew Milward
andrewmilward@zirk.us

Three essays on thought and language, the history of , and the creative writing process:

The Absent World: andrewmilward.net/files/absent
Parmenides and Heidegger: andrewmilward.net/files/parmen
Instinct and Intelligence: andrewmilward.net/files/instin

November 11, 2022
rhetoricked shared a status by annagibson
Anna Gibson PhD
annagibson@mastodon.lol

Can’t believe my next step as professor is trying to be a human CAPTCHA

January 18, 2023
rhetoricked shared a status by ericgoldman
Eric Goldman ☑ (he/him)
ericgoldman@mastodon.lawprofs.org

The long-running hiQ v LinkedIn scraping case quietly reached its denouement this week--a total loss for hiQ bit.ly/3FDl7mF Guest blogger Kieran McCarthy wrote an explainer to declutter the extensive confusion that grew up around the case bit.ly/3UKpalu

December 09, 2022
rhetoricked shared a status by josh
Josh Braun
josh@sciences.social

New for all the fresh faces. I'm an associate professor at UMass Amherst, where I teach about and . My research focuses on media distribution and, occasionally, dysfunction in the adtech industry.

I also co-edit a book series on the civic impacts of media distribution for The MIT Press, so feel free to hit me up if you're working on a relevant project.

November 18, 2022