7 ms·

Argdown: A simple syntax for complex argumentation

120 points by stareatgoats 4y ago

a9h74j 4y ago
I haven't gone beyond reading the page, but the intent matches my intuition that we need tools for better following (and agreeing upon?) good "geometries" for arguments.
- spockz 4y ago
  Same here. I call it “structured reasoning” in my mind. I have been eyeballing https://www.kialo.com/ https://www.kialo.com/ but I’m very hesitant to use it for company decisions.
  - a9h74j 4y ago
    As a sample, I just glanced at the UBI discussion there. Each claim pro and con, when clicked upon, seems to break into another level of claims pro and con. And apparently crowdsourced as well. Looks like a fantastic resource. Very much what I was hoping for.
- 082349872349872 4y ago
  When corporate email threads start getting lengthy, I like to flow* them. Too often it's not even a question of premises and conclusions, but rather I find technical threads get hung up on quibbling minor issues, while failing to engage ("arguing past each other") wrt fairly major points. * eg https://www.speechanddebate.org/wp-content/uploads/Big-Questions-Judge-Training-Intro-to-Flowing.pdf https://www.speechanddebate.org/wp-content/uploads/Big-Quest...
tunesmith 4y ago
Interesting. I've been working on a side project that combines argument mapping with actual syntax checking - meaning that if an argument's conclusion is purported to be "proven" via the sufficiency of its premises and sub premises, then a counterpoint further down in the graph will notify the conclusion that its truth value is now in doubt. I wonder if it could use argdown as an input method.
- mistermann 4y ago
  Are you working on this out in the open? I'd be very interested to see what it looks like and where you're planning to go with it.
  - tunesmith 4y ago
    Yeah, maybe I should. I've thought about doing a stream on it for a while. It's a fun mix of actors, react, graph viz, and philosophy.
    - xcdzvyn 4y ago
      Do you stream at all currently? I'll keep an eye on your Twitch etc. if you're planning on streaming this stuff. I'm also very interested.
    - mistermann 4y ago
      Well if there's any way to find out if you do reveal anything I'd love to know because this sounds very interesting and novel.
- djokkataja 4y ago
  That sounds interesting; the weakness of the examples provided with Argdown is that they come to a conclusion, but they don't indicate why that conclusion was chosen over the other option, and it's not clear that the conclusions actually address everything.
gkfasdfasdf 4y ago
Am I the only one that thought this was a universal format for describing CLI arguments?
- jszymborski 4y ago
  I certainly thought that.
- radlad 4y ago
  I've long wished I could "declare" my CLI arguments in a Markdown-like syntax (e.g. using `[]` and `<>` to denote optional vs. required arguments) and have some library figure it all out for me.
  - Flimm 4y ago
    You're in for a treat: that library already exists and has been ported to multiple programming languages: http://docopt.org http://docopt.org
    - gkfasdfasdf 4y ago
      Wow thanks, that does look interesting!
    - qbasic_forever 4y ago
      Doesn't look like it's maintained anymore, sadly. All of the major language repos have long threads trying to figure out who can pick up maintenance of the project.
  - lgas 4y ago
    https://docopt.org/ https://docopt.org/ may be of interest.
  - AndrewDucker 4y ago
    PowerShell does exactly that for its scripts. And then uses those definitions for autocomplete, validation, etc.
rco8786 4y ago
This is dying for some sort of example on the front page. I clicked around trying to figure out what it was, assuming it was some sort of argument syntax for CLI tools.
- gpuhacker 4y ago
  Same here, I read the Readme twice and was still puzzled what this is for.
- mulmen 4y ago
  Did you try clicking on examples/, docs, or on the online sandbox?
  - rco8786 4y ago
    Yes, and I eventually figured it out. That's why I am saying it would be nice if it were on the front page, so people don't have to click around.
  - civopsec 4y ago
    Can’t say I find the examples motivating. Just tells me more about the author’s tastes and proclivities than the utility of all this markup.
stareatgoats 4y ago
I've been scouring the web for things like this for a while; open source tools that can represent an argument process in a visual manner reminiscent of a workflow. There is obviously kialo.com, but it doesn't quite tick all the boxes IMO. Interest in this kind of thing additionally seems to have died out a few years back. Are we waiting for an AI solution perhaps? In the meantime Argdown perhaps is the closest thing available.
- Obscurity4340 4y ago
  There's Hypernomicon on Mac and Rationale for online/PC maybe
nepger21 4y ago
For anybody wondering, argumentation here is this: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentation_framework https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentation_framework I found the idea quite interesting within my master's program during AI class. My prof. research group was trying to use this to detect fake news.
breck 4y ago
Another cool site I found recently (via the replit guy) is https://www.rootclaim.com/ https://www.rootclaim.com/ Very cool way to present arguments. I'm thinking of taking that, as well as argdown, and building some easy to use keywords in scroll https://scroll.pub/ https://scroll.pub/

120 points by stareatgoats 4y ago

I haven't gone beyond reading the page, but the intent matches my intuition that we need tools for better following (and agreeing upon?) good "geometries" for arguments.

spockz 4y ago
Same here. I call it “structured reasoning” in my mind. I have been eyeballing https://www.kialo.com/ https://www.kialo.com/ but I’m very hesitant to use it for company decisions.
- a9h74j 4y ago
  As a sample, I just glanced at the UBI discussion there. Each claim pro and con, when clicked upon, seems to break into another level of claims pro and con. And apparently crowdsourced as well. Looks like a fantastic resource. Very much what I was hoping for.
082349872349872 4y ago
When corporate email threads start getting lengthy, I like to flow* them. Too often it's not even a question of premises and conclusions, but rather I find technical threads get hung up on quibbling minor issues, while failing to engage ("arguing past each other") wrt fairly major points. * eg https://www.speechanddebate.org/wp-content/uploads/Big-Questions-Judge-Training-Intro-to-Flowing.pdf https://www.speechanddebate.org/wp-content/uploads/Big-Quest...

tunesmith 4y ago

Interesting. I've been working on a side project that combines argument mapping with actual syntax checking - meaning that if an argument's conclusion is purported to be "proven" via the sufficiency of its premises and sub premises, then a counterpoint further down in the graph will notify the conclusion that its truth value is now in doubt. I wonder if it could use argdown as an input method.

mistermann 4y ago
Are you working on this out in the open? I'd be very interested to see what it looks like and where you're planning to go with it.
- tunesmith 4y ago
  Yeah, maybe I should. I've thought about doing a stream on it for a while. It's a fun mix of actors, react, graph viz, and philosophy.
  - xcdzvyn 4y ago
    Do you stream at all currently? I'll keep an eye on your Twitch etc. if you're planning on streaming this stuff. I'm also very interested.
  - mistermann 4y ago
    Well if there's any way to find out if you do reveal anything I'd love to know because this sounds very interesting and novel.
djokkataja 4y ago
That sounds interesting; the weakness of the examples provided with Argdown is that they come to a conclusion, but they don't indicate why that conclusion was chosen over the other option, and it's not clear that the conclusions actually address everything.

gkfasdfasdf 4y ago

Am I the only one that thought this was a universal format for describing CLI arguments?

jszymborski 4y ago
I certainly thought that.
radlad 4y ago
I've long wished I could "declare" my CLI arguments in a Markdown-like syntax (e.g. using `[]` and `<>` to denote optional vs. required arguments) and have some library figure it all out for me.
- Flimm 4y ago
  You're in for a treat: that library already exists and has been ported to multiple programming languages: http://docopt.org http://docopt.org
  - gkfasdfasdf 4y ago
    Wow thanks, that does look interesting!
  - qbasic_forever 4y ago
    Doesn't look like it's maintained anymore, sadly. All of the major language repos have long threads trying to figure out who can pick up maintenance of the project.
- lgas 4y ago
  https://docopt.org/ https://docopt.org/ may be of interest.
- AndrewDucker 4y ago
  PowerShell does exactly that for its scripts. And then uses those definitions for autocomplete, validation, etc.

rco8786 4y ago

This is dying for some sort of example on the front page. I clicked around trying to figure out what it was, assuming it was some sort of argument syntax for CLI tools.

gpuhacker 4y ago
Same here, I read the Readme twice and was still puzzled what this is for.
mulmen 4y ago
Did you try clicking on examples/, docs, or on the online sandbox?
- rco8786 4y ago
  Yes, and I eventually figured it out. That's why I am saying it would be nice if it were on the front page, so people don't have to click around.
- civopsec 4y ago
  Can’t say I find the examples motivating. Just tells me more about the author’s tastes and proclivities than the utility of all this markup.

stareatgoats 4y ago

I've been scouring the web for things like this for a while; open source tools that can represent an argument process in a visual manner reminiscent of a workflow. There is obviously kialo.com, but it doesn't quite tick all the boxes IMO. Interest in this kind of thing additionally seems to have died out a few years back. Are we waiting for an AI solution perhaps? In the meantime Argdown perhaps is the closest thing available.

Obscurity4340 4y ago
There's Hypernomicon on Mac and Rationale for online/PC maybe

nepger21 4y ago

For anybody wondering, argumentation here is this: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentation_framework https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentation_framework I found the idea quite interesting within my master's program during AI class. My prof. research group was trying to use this to detect fake news.

breck 4y ago

Another cool site I found recently (via the replit guy) is https://www.rootclaim.com/ https://www.rootclaim.com/ Very cool way to present arguments. I'm thinking of taking that, as well as argdown, and building some easy to use keywords in scroll https://scroll.pub/ https://scroll.pub/