<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: What and why?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.amap.org.uk/2008/12/what-and-why/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.amap.org.uk/2008/12/what-and-why/</link>
	<description>Argument mapping, debate and critical thinking site.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 06 Dec 2009 00:41:36 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: 8ninths&#187; Blog Archive &#187; aMap, I see your point&#8230;</title>
		<link>http://www.amap.org.uk/2008/12/what-and-why/comment-page-1/#comment-58</link>
		<dc:creator>8ninths&#187; Blog Archive &#187; aMap, I see your point&#8230;</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Feb 2009 22:13:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://amap.redefine.co.uk/?p=37#comment-58</guid>
		<description>[...] to a blog post by Chris Quigley of Delib (part of Team Rubber) , aMap is the visualization of arguments according [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] to a blog post by Chris Quigley of Delib (part of Team Rubber) , aMap is the visualization of arguments according [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: argument maps &#171; Intersecting with IT</title>
		<link>http://www.amap.org.uk/2008/12/what-and-why/comment-page-1/#comment-50</link>
		<dc:creator>argument maps &#171; Intersecting with IT</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Feb 2009 16:08:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://amap.redefine.co.uk/?p=37#comment-50</guid>
		<description>[...] sure to read founder Chris Quigley&#8217;s blog posts on What And Why and How to Win Arguments And Influence [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] sure to read founder Chris Quigley&#8217;s blog posts on What And Why and How to Win Arguments And Influence [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: preclectic.com &#187; Compelling Arguments: aMap</title>
		<link>http://www.amap.org.uk/2008/12/what-and-why/comment-page-1/#comment-42</link>
		<dc:creator>preclectic.com &#187; Compelling Arguments: aMap</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Feb 2009 15:47:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://amap.redefine.co.uk/?p=37#comment-42</guid>
		<description>[...] resource that maps out complex debates in a simple visual format. The site also offers advice about the what and why of argument mapping&#8211;information that&#8217;s sure to help teachers and students refine their thinking. By helping [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] resource that maps out complex debates in a simple visual format. The site also offers advice about the what and why of argument mapping&#8211;information that&#8217;s sure to help teachers and students refine their thinking. By helping [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Myspace Proxies 360 » The Art of Arguing, Visualized</title>
		<link>http://www.amap.org.uk/2008/12/what-and-why/comment-page-1/#comment-26</link>
		<dc:creator>Myspace Proxies 360 » The Art of Arguing, Visualized</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Jan 2009 06:16:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://amap.redefine.co.uk/?p=37#comment-26</guid>
		<description>[...] It&#8217;s an attempt at visualizing various stances on a subject, which can be almost anything; from simple comparisons such as &#8220;Masala or Vindaloo&#8221; to questions such as &#8220;Should agencies launch their own products?&#8221; It&#8217;s based on informal logic; you can read more about the concept behind the project in the authors&#8217; blog post. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] It&#8217;s an attempt at visualizing various stances on a subject, which can be almost anything; from simple comparisons such as &#8220;Masala or Vindaloo&#8221; to questions such as &#8220;Should agencies launch their own products?&#8221; It&#8217;s based on informal logic; you can read more about the concept behind the project in the authors&#8217; blog post. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sharing Arguments 2.0 with the aMap Widget &#124; Social Networking Blog - SociableBlog.com</title>
		<link>http://www.amap.org.uk/2008/12/what-and-why/comment-page-1/#comment-24</link>
		<dc:creator>Sharing Arguments 2.0 with the aMap Widget &#124; Social Networking Blog - SociableBlog.com</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Jan 2009 18:04:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://amap.redefine.co.uk/?p=37#comment-24</guid>
		<description>[...] aMap&#8217;s based around &#8220;informal logic&#8221; the kind of logic that people (unknowingly) use in everyday [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] aMap&#8217;s based around &#8220;informal logic&#8221; the kind of logic that people (unknowingly) use in everyday [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jim Arlow</title>
		<link>http://www.amap.org.uk/2008/12/what-and-why/comment-page-1/#comment-19</link>
		<dc:creator>Jim Arlow</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Jan 2009 06:53:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://amap.redefine.co.uk/?p=37#comment-19</guid>
		<description>Great idea! However, as it stands this isn&#039;t really argument mapping, rather it is position mapping. All this lets people do is state and support their positions. To truly capture an argument (as opposed to a position) you need all sides i.e. a way to capture counter propositions (reasons that counter the position), counter arguments and evidence for that. This would make the approach much more powerful by bringing in elements of Dialog Mapping.

I guess you are aware of Compendium?
http://compendium.open.ac.uk/institute/</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great idea! However, as it stands this isn&#8217;t really argument mapping, rather it is position mapping. All this lets people do is state and support their positions. To truly capture an argument (as opposed to a position) you need all sides i.e. a way to capture counter propositions (reasons that counter the position), counter arguments and evidence for that. This would make the approach much more powerful by bringing in elements of Dialog Mapping.</p>
<p>I guess you are aware of Compendium?<br />
<a href="http://compendium.open.ac.uk/institute/" rel="nofollow">http://compendium.open.ac.uk/institute/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Art of Arguing, Visualized &#124; TechWeb</title>
		<link>http://www.amap.org.uk/2008/12/what-and-why/comment-page-1/#comment-11</link>
		<dc:creator>The Art of Arguing, Visualized &#124; TechWeb</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Jan 2009 17:00:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://amap.redefine.co.uk/?p=37#comment-11</guid>
		<description>[...] It&#8217;s an attempt at visualizing various stances on a subject, which can be almost anything; from simple comparisons such as &#8220;Masala or Vindaloo&#8221; to questions such as &#8220;Should agencies launch their own products?&#8221; It&#8217;s based on informal logic; you can read more about the concept behind the project in the authors&#8217; blog post. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] It&#8217;s an attempt at visualizing various stances on a subject, which can be almost anything; from simple comparisons such as &#8220;Masala or Vindaloo&#8221; to questions such as &#8220;Should agencies launch their own products?&#8221; It&#8217;s based on informal logic; you can read more about the concept behind the project in the authors&#8217; blog post. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Art of Arguing, Visualized</title>
		<link>http://www.amap.org.uk/2008/12/what-and-why/comment-page-1/#comment-10</link>
		<dc:creator>The Art of Arguing, Visualized</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Jan 2009 15:23:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://amap.redefine.co.uk/?p=37#comment-10</guid>
		<description>[...] It’s an attempt at visualizing various stances on a subject, which can be almost anything; from simple comparisons such as “Masala or Vindaloo” to questions such as “Should agencies launch their own products?” It’s based on informal logic; you can read more about the concept behind the project in the authors’ blog post. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] It’s an attempt at visualizing various stances on a subject, which can be almost anything; from simple comparisons such as “Masala or Vindaloo” to questions such as “Should agencies launch their own products?” It’s based on informal logic; you can read more about the concept behind the project in the authors’ blog post. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: free downloadThe Art of Arguing, Visualized &#124; 82123</title>
		<link>http://www.amap.org.uk/2008/12/what-and-why/comment-page-1/#comment-9</link>
		<dc:creator>free downloadThe Art of Arguing, Visualized &#124; 82123</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Jan 2009 15:18:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://amap.redefine.co.uk/?p=37#comment-9</guid>
		<description>[...] It&#8217;s an attempt at visualizing various stances on a subject, which can be almost anything; from simple comparisons such as &#8220;Masala or Vindaloo&#8221; to questions such as &#8220;Should agencies launch their own products?&#8221; It&#8217;s based on informal logic; you can read more about the concept behind the project in the authors&#8217; blog post. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] It&#8217;s an attempt at visualizing various stances on a subject, which can be almost anything; from simple comparisons such as &#8220;Masala or Vindaloo&#8221; to questions such as &#8220;Should agencies launch their own products?&#8221; It&#8217;s based on informal logic; you can read more about the concept behind the project in the authors&#8217; blog post. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Art of Arguing, Visualized - CHASTER - All Around The World</title>
		<link>http://www.amap.org.uk/2008/12/what-and-why/comment-page-1/#comment-7</link>
		<dc:creator>The Art of Arguing, Visualized - CHASTER - All Around The World</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Jan 2009 13:44:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://amap.redefine.co.uk/?p=37#comment-7</guid>
		<description>[...] It&#8217;s an attempt at visualizing various stances on a subject, which can be almost anything; from simple comparisons such as &#8220;Masala or Vindaloo&#8221; to questions such as &#8220;Should agencies launch their own products?&#8221; It&#8217;s based on informal logic; you can read more about the concept behind the project in the authors&#8217; blog post. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] It&#8217;s an attempt at visualizing various stances on a subject, which can be almost anything; from simple comparisons such as &#8220;Masala or Vindaloo&#8221; to questions such as &#8220;Should agencies launch their own products?&#8221; It&#8217;s based on informal logic; you can read more about the concept behind the project in the authors&#8217; blog post. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
