Consider, for example, the following exchanges, exemplified by the “non-Scottish” case: an unconventional approach to argumenting examines abstract arguments in which “argument” is considered a primitive term, so that no internal structure of arguments is taken into account. This approach actively engages learners to process and synthesize information and concepts, rather than using red memorization of facts and figures. Learners collaborate on projects in which they must work as a group to understand the concepts presented to them. In this new hybrid approach, argumentation, with or without empirical evidence, is used to draw convincing conclusions on moral, scientific, episcial or species questions in which science alone cannot answer. Pragmatism and many intellectual developments in the humanities and social sciences have grown from “non-philosophical” argumentories that have located formal and material arguments in certain intellectual fields. These theories include informal logic, social epistemology, ethnomethody, linguistic acts, sociology of knowledge, sociology of science and social psychology. These new theories are not illogical or antilogical. They find logical coherence in most discourse communities. These theories are therefore often referred to as “sociological” because they focus on the social foundations of knowledge.
After the presentation of the evidence, there is a final argument. Even if the rules prevent winnings by mistake or don`t accept if you use the Entry Charge, it is an automatic loss, regardless of the rules. There is some confusion about the difference between these two types of learning. Indeed, cooperative learning is a kind of collaborative learning, which is why the two may seem similar at first glance. Although there are some differences between theories of collaborative learning, collaborative learning is supported by the concept that learning is a natural social act and that learning is done by word, trying to solve problems and understand the world. Piaget also presented a four-step cognitive development process, which he believed he needed to have before learning could begin. Van Eemeren and Grootendorst provide a detailed list of rules to apply at each stage of the protocol. [Citation required] Moreover, in the argument of these authors, there are certain protagonist and antagonistic roles in the protocol, determined by the conditions that justify the necessity of argumentation. Walton`s logical argument model examined the evidence and justification of the predominant theory of analytical philosophy, based on a true framework of faith.  In logical reasoning, knowledge is considered a form of obligation of belief, firmly fixed by a method of argument that tests evidence on both sides and uses standards of evidence to determine whether a sentence is qualified as knowledge.