| Abstract: | This paper extends previous work in the development of a methodology for ill-structured policy problems. It argues that recent advances in the structure and logic of argumentation allow one to develop a new basis for treating policy issues. In brief, policies may be viewed as the outcome of a process of reasoning (argumentation) whose purpose is to establish the basis (rationale) for the policy. This paper shows how the tools of symbolic logic may be applied to handle arguments containing strong inconsistencies. The tools presented allow treatment of one of the most fundamental issues concerned with ill-structured problems, the divergence between opposing formulations or perceptions of a problem. |
