Argumentation Schemes and Burden of Proof

This paper analyzes the phenomenon of a shift of the burden of proof in persuasion dialogues in which arguments are constructed according to argumentation schemes. Some sample dialogues are analyzed with arguments from expert opinion, revealing that some critical questions of this scheme carry with them a burden of proof on the questioner while others do not, and that the burden of proof can become the subject of debate during a dialogue. Then these dialogues are diagrammed with the argument visualization software Araucaria, and a simple formal protocol is proposed of persuasion dialogues with embedded burden-of-proof dialogues.