|Abstract||The purpose of this paper is to question some commonly accepted patterns of reasoning involving nonmonotonic logics that generate multiple extensions. In particular, I argue that the phenomenon of floating conclusions indicates a problem with the view that the skeptical consequences of such theories should be identified with the statements that are supported by each of their various extensions.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Only published papers are available at libraries|
Similar books and articles
Joshua Seigal (2010). Skeptical Theism, Moral Skepticism, and Divine Deception. Forum Philosophicum 15 (2):251-274.
Marilyn Ford (2005). Human Nonmonotonic Reasoning: The Importance of Seeing the Logical Strength of Arguments. Synthese 146 (1-2):71 - 92.
Victoria F. Shaw (1996). The Cognitive Processes in Informal Reasoning. Thinking and Reasoning 2 (1):51 – 80.
Raymond Dacey (1978). A Theory of Conclusions. Philosophy of Science 45 (4):563-574.
Paul Kurtz (2010). Exuberant Skepticism. Prometheus Books 59 John Glenn Drive.
Brian Ribeiro (2004). Skeptical Parasitism and the Continuity Argument. Metaphilosophy 35 (5):714-732.
Justin C. Fisher (2006). On Higher-Order and Free-Floating Chances. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 57 (4):691-707.
Linton Wang & Oliver Tai (2010). Skeptical Conclusions. Erkenntnis 72 (2):177 - 204.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads6 ( #145,458 of 548,984 )
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?