Graduate studies at Western
Studia Logica 94 (3):307 - 330 (2010)
|Abstract||The paper presents an infinite hierarchy PR m [ m = 1, 2, . . . ] of sound and complete axiomatic systems for modal logic with graded probabilistic modalities , which are to reflect what I have elsewhere called the Bolding-Ekelöf degrees of evidential strength as applied to the establishment of matters of fact in law-courts. Our present approach is seen to differ from earlier work by the author in that it treats the logic of these graded modalities not only from a semantical or model-theoretic viewpoint but from a prooftheoretical and axiomatic stance as well. A paramount feature of the approach is its use of so-called systematic frame constants as labels of diverse grades of probability. Apart from this novel feature our approach can be seen to go back to pioneering work by Lou Goble in 1970.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Andrew C. Stumer, Book Review: Ho, A Philosophy of Evidence Law: Justice in the Search for Truth. [REVIEW]
L. F. Goble (1970). Grades Of Modality. Logique Et Analyse 13:323-334.
Christina Schneider (1994). Probability: A New Logico-Semantical Approach. [REVIEW] Journal for General Philosophy of Science 25 (1):107 - 124.
Alex Stein (2005). Foundations of Evidence Law. Oxford University Press.
Ferdinand Schoeman (1987). Cohen on Inductive Probability and the Law of Evidence. Philosophy of Science 54 (1):76-91.
James Franklin (2001). The Science of Conjecture: Probability Before Pascal: Contents. Johns Hopkins University Press.
Timothy Williamson (1998). Conditionalizing on Knowledge. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 49 (1):89-121.
Howard Smokler (1977). Three Grades of Probabilistic Involvement. Philosophical Studies 32 (2):129 - 142.
SolomonEyal Shimony & Ephraim Nissan (2001). Kappa Calculus and Evidential Strength: A Note on Åqvist's Logical Theory of Legal Evidence. Artificial Intelligence and Law 9 (2-3).
Lennart Åqvist (2007). An Interpretation of Probability in the Law of Evidence Based on Pro-Et-Contra Argumentation. Artificial Intelligence and Law 15 (4):391-410.
Added to index2010-03-31
Total downloads21 ( #65,392 of 739,304 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,243 of 739,304 )
How can I increase my downloads?