David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Argument and Computation 3 (1):1 - 19 (2012)
John Pollock (1940?2009) was an influential American philosopher who made important contributions to various fields, including epistemology and cognitive science. In the last 25 years of his life, he also contributed to the computational study of defeasible reasoning and practical cognition in artificial intelligence. He developed one of the first formal systems for argumentation-based inference and he put many issues on the research agenda that are still relevant for the argumentation community today. This paper presents an appreciation of Pollock's work on defeasible reasoning and its relevance for the computational study of argument. In our opinion, Pollock deserves to be remembered as one of the founding fathers of the field of computational argument, while, moreover, his work contains important lessons for current research in this field, reminding us of the richness of its object of study
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Gregor Betz (2016). Truth in Evidence and Truth in Arguments Without Logical Omniscience. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 67 (4):1117-1137.
Similar books and articles
Wolfgang Spohn (2002). A Brief Comparison of Pollock's Defeasible Reasoning and Ranking Functions. Synthese 131 (1):39-56.
Robert L. Causey (2003). Computational Dialogic Defeasible Reasoning. Argumentation 17 (4):421-450.
Pollock † & L. John (2011). Defeasible Reasoning and Degrees of Justification. Argument and Computation 1 (1):7-22.
Kevin B. Korb (1992). The Collapse of Collective Defeat: Lessons From the Lottery Paradox. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1992:230-236.
John L. Pollock (1991). Self-Defeating Arguments. Minds and Machines 1 (4):367-392.
Carlos Iván Chesñevar & Guillermo Ricardo Simari (2007). Modelling Inference in Argumentation Through Labelled Deduction: Formalization and Logical Properties. [REVIEW] Logica Universalis 1 (1):93-124.
Branden Fitelson (2010). Pollock on Probability in Epistemology. [REVIEW] Philosophical Studies 148 (3):455 - 465.
Ron Sun (ed.) (2008). The Cambridge Handbook of Computational Psychology. Cambridge University Press.
Henry Prakken (2011). An Abstract Framework for Argumentation with Structured Arguments. Argument and Computation 1 (2):93-124.
Rick Grush (2001). The Semantic Challenge to Computational Neuroscience. In Peter K. Machamer, Peter McLaughlin & Rick Grush (eds.), Theory and Method in the Neurosciences. University of Pittsburgh Press 155--172.
Added to index2012-03-14
Total downloads20 ( #231,633 of 1,902,713 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #446,006 of 1,902,713 )
How can I increase my downloads?