  Dialectical frameworks are a unifying model of formal argumentation, where
argumentative relations between arguments are represented by assigning
acceptance conditions to atomic arguments. Their generality allow them to cover
a number of different approaches with varying forms of representing the
argumentation structure. Boolean regulatory networks are used to model the
dynamics of complex biological processes, taking into account the interactions
of biological compounds, such as proteins or genes. These models have proven
highly useful for comprehending such biological processes, allowing to
reproduce known behaviour and testing new hypotheses and predictions in silico,
for example in the context of new medical treatments. While both these
approaches stem from entirely different communities, it turns out that there
are striking similarities in their appearence. In this paper, we study the
relation between these two formalisms revealing their communalities as well as
their differences, and introducing a correspondence that allows to establish
novel results for the individual formalisms.
