Firman
Jacky Visser (autor de contenidos)
John Lawrence (autor de contenidos)
Resumen
The argumentative analysis of cultural heritage debates has been steadily gaining relevance in recent years. This prominence is due in part to an increased polarisation in societal discussions about cultural heritage, and in part to ongoing efforts to devise theoretical models of these debates. From an argumentative perspective, cultural heritage debates are of particular interest because they tend to contain a high level of conflict and societal impact. The polarised nature of the debates stems not just from the diverging viewpoints and emotional attachments, but also from disagreements about the central concepts and tenets at issue. That is to say: debates in cultural heritage often involve deep disagreements.Our main goal in this paper is to lay the foundation of a new framework for modelling the arguments and viewpoints at issue in this domain, and deep disagreements in particular. Our approach is similar to Doerr et al.’s Factual Argumentation Frameworks, while broadening the focus from monological arguments to debates and deep disagreements. To do so, we systematically combine an ontology for argumentation, the Argument Interchange Format (AIF), to a domain discourse ontology, Cultural Heritage Abstract Reference (CHARM).The AIF is an ontology facilitating the conceptual interchange between various perspectives on, and models of argumentation. It comprises three layers: i) a hierarchy of concepts for describing argument structure as a graph in terms of nodes and arrows; ii) argument schemes for capturing patterns of reasoning and conflict; iii) the instantiation of the elements of the two previous layers with concrete text segments. Conceptually, argument maps compliant with the AIF ontology consist of information (i-)nodes representing premises and conclusions, connected through schemes expressing inference, conflict and other argumentatively relevant relations. CHARM is a domain ontology for cultural heritage containing over 200 concepts describing tangible elements such as places, buildings or paintings, performative entities such as social acts or expressive designs, abstract entities such as values or norms, agents such as individuals or groups, expert and non-expert valorisations, and representations such as models, photographs or maps. CHARM is a reference model – that is, an abstract common ground from which extensions can be easily generated to tackle specific projects or heritage-related endeavours.The connection between AIF and CHARM is twofold (Figure 1). On the one hand, instances of the Argumentation class in CHARM (an abstract entity of a propositional and argumentative nature), can be more expressively described via AIF, so that their propositional content and argumentative content can be explicitly represented. On the other hand, AIF information nodes, can be unpacked and described in more detail through CHARM.The new framework will allow us to explore the type of conflict underlying these debates, which can range from something superficial (such as properties attribution) to something deep (such as disagreement about the existence of the cultural object altogether). In addition, automated methods for argument mining can be leveraged to inform the cultural heritage reference model.
Palabras clave
Argumentation. Cultural heritage. Ontology.