The idea of resolving dispute through the exchange of arguments and reasons has been central to society for millennia. We exchange arguments as a way of getting at the truth in contexts as diverse as science, the court room, and our everyday lives. In democracies, political decisions should be negotiated through argument, not deception, or even worse, brute force. If argument is to lead to the truth or to good decisions, then some arguments must be better than others and 'argument strength' must have some meaningful connection with truth. Can argument strength be measured in a way that tracks an objective relationship with truth and not just mere persuasiveness? This article describes recent developments in providing such measures.

中文翻译：

---

真实世界论证中的论证质量

数千年来，通过交换论据和理由来解决争端的想法一直是社会的核心。我们交换论点是为了在科学、法庭和我们的日常生活等多种多样的背景下了解真相。在民主国家，政治决定应该通过争论而不是欺骗，或者更糟糕的是，通过蛮力进行谈判。如果论证要导致真相或正确的决定，那么某些论证必须比其他论证更好，并且“论证强度”必须与真相有某种有意义的联系。是否可以通过跟踪与真理的客观关系而不仅仅是说服力的方式来衡量论证强度？本文介绍了提供此类措施的最新进展。