The Study Of Similarity-based Scientific Argumentation

Scientific argumentation is an integral part of scientific research,and similarity is of universal importance in scientific argumentation.Analogy and metaphor are two typical strategies in similarity-based scientific argumentation,and they play an important role in scientific research.With the multidisciplinary,all-dimensional and deep development of scientific research,questions such as "what is similarity","how is similarity used in scientific argumentation" and "how does similarity differ in different kinds of argumentation? This thesis takes an informal logic approach to the issue of similarity.In this thesis,we attempt to reconstruct the argumentation schema of metaphor and analogy based on the integration of the Toulmin model and mapping theory,and then analyse the different manifestations of similarity in metaphor and analogy,and finally explain the characteristics and significance of similarity in scientific argumentation.Main content in different parts are roughly distributed as follows.Chapter 1 is the introduction.This part introduces the basis of the article,a review of the research,its content and significance.Chapter 2 is a discussion of similarity.Firstly,we analyse the concept of similarity from the perspectives of set theory and system theory;then,since similarity is classified according to different criteria,we attempt to propose criteria for determining similarity;finally,the relationship between similarity and relevance is discussed.Chapter 3 discusses similarity-based scientific argumentation.On the one hand,the particular manifestations of similarity in the development of science are pointed out;on the other hand,the forms of scientific metaphor and scientific analogy as well as the relationship between the two forms of argumentation are analysed.Chapter 4 is devoted to the reconstruction and analysis of scientific argumentation.It is the core of the thesis.Firstly,we form a theoretical conception by integrating the structural mapping theory into the Toulmin model;then,the argumentation structures of scientific metaphor and scientific analogy are reconstructed;finally,the different manifestations of similarity in these two argumentation methods are analysed to answer the question "how similarity is applied to scientific argumentation".Finally,the thesis analyses the differences between the two approaches to argumentation,and attempts to answer the questions "how is similarity applied to scientific argumentation".Chapter 5 is the conclusion.This part identifies the innovations of the thesis,point out the shortcomings,and provide an outlook for future work.