PhilGoetz comments on Debate tools: an experience report - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (72)
I would recommend that we try to create our own debate-mapping tool. It might end up being surprisingly easy.
I've already used PHP, GraphViz, and MediaWiki to implement a vaguely similar project, the Transhumanist Wiki Scenarios Map.
Unfortunately, that project ended up being less useful than I had hoped, and has been abandoned for now.
Today, I made a rough sketch of what a debate-mapping tool based on these tools might look like.
A VERY rough sketch.
Pretty much every detail is probably going to need to be changed in order for it to be useable.
Anyway, here's a link to that experiment
Once again, It didn't turn out as well as I had hoped.
The basic idea is that you take a chat log of a debate, and add some annotations, marking which are the main claims of the argument, and indicating which arguments support or oppose which other arguments.
Then, run a script on this annotated chat log, and it will output a graph of the arguments in the debate.
One advantage of this method is that the text and the annotations can be updated as the debate continues, and the graph will be updated to match this new data.
Some ideas for things to change:
change the formatting of the annotations. the word "claim" is unnecessary
set up the actual PHP script. These example graphs were generated by manually formatting the annotations in the graphviz format.
set up different formats for the output. A graph is not the most useful format. A better idea would be a table summarizing the info for each of the claims:
perhaps each claim could have its own wiki page, similar to how the scenarios map works
add more keywords, besides just "supports" and "opposes". Some examples are:
add a way to indicate which speaker agrees with which claims, and deduce from that which conclusions are supported by implications of their assumptions
set up the script to automatically generate the graphs as the wiki page is updated
more?
Don't think about the output at all at this stage. The annotations should be XML. The output should be left to the discretion of the browser.