121 found
Order:
  1. Carlos E. Alchourrón, Peter Gärdenfors & David Makinson (1985). On the Logic of Theory Change: Partial Meet Contraction and Revision Functions. Journal of Symbolic Logic 50 (2):510-530.
    This paper extends earlier work by its authors on formal aspects of the processes of contracting a theory to eliminate a proposition and revising a theory to introduce a proposition. In the course of the earlier work, Gardenfors developed general postulates of a more or less equational nature for such processes, whilst Alchourron and Makinson studied the particular case of contraction functions that are maximal, in the sense of yielding a maximal subset of the theory (or alternatively, of one of (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   297 citations  
  2. David C. Makinson (1965). The Paradox of the Preface. Analysis 25 (6):205-207.
  3.  63
    Carlos E. Alchourron & David Makinson (1982). On the Logic of Theory Change: Contraction Functions and Their Associated Revision Functions. Theoria 48 (1):14-37.
  4. David Makinson (2005). Bridges From Classical to Nonmonotonic Logic. King's College Publications.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   11 citations  
  5.  25
    David Makinson (2011). Conditional Probability in the Light of Qualitative Belief Change. Journal of Philosophical Logic 40 (2):121 - 153.
    We explore ways in which purely qualitative belief change in the AGM tradition throws light on options in the treatment of conditional probability. First, by helping see why it can be useful to go beyond the ratio rule defining conditional from one-place probability. Second, by clarifying what is at stake in different ways of doing that. Third, by suggesting novel forms of conditional probability corresponding to familiar variants of qualitative belief change, and conversely. Likewise, we explain how recent work on (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   7 citations  
  6.  91
    James Hawthorne & David Makinson (2007). The Quantitative/Qualitative Watershed for Rules of Uncertain Inference. Studia Logica 86 (2):247-297.
    We chart the ways in which closure properties of consequence relations for uncertain inference take on different forms according to whether the relations are generated in a quantitative or a qualitative manner. Among the main themes are: the identification of watershed conditions between probabilistically and qualitatively sound rules; failsafe and classicality transforms of qualitatively sound rules; non-Horn conditions satisfied by probabilistic consequence; representation and completeness problems; and threshold-sensitive conditions such as ‘preface’ and ‘lottery’ rules.
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   11 citations  
  7. David Makinson & Leendert van der Torre (2000). Input/Output Logics. Journal of Philosophical Logic 29 (4):383-408.
    In a range of contexts, one comes across processes resembling inference, but where input propositions are not in general included among outputs, and the operation is not in any way reversible. Examples arise in contexts of conditional obligations, goals, ideals, preferences, actions, and beliefs. Our purpose is to develop a theory of such input/output operations. Four are singled out: simple-minded, basic (making intelligent use of disjunctive inputs), simple-minded reusable (in which outputs may be recycled as inputs), and basic reusable. They (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   14 citations  
  8. David Makinson (1969). A Normal Modal Calculus Between T and S4 Without the Finite Model Property. Journal of Symbolic Logic 34 (1):35-38.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   10 citations  
  9.  23
    David Makinson (1987). On the Status of the Postulate of Recovery in the Logic of Theory Change. Journal of Philosophical Logic 16 (4):383 - 394.
  10.  6
    David Makinson & Leendert van der Torre (2001). Constraints for Input/Output Logics. Journal of Philosophical Logic 30 (2):155 - 185.
    In a previous paper we developed a general theory of input/output logics. These are operations resembling inference, but where inputs need not be included among outputs, and outputs need not be reusable as inputs. In the present paper we study what happens when they are constrained to render output consistent with input. This is of interest for deontic logic, where it provides a manner of handling contrary-to-duty obligations. Our procedure is to constrain the set of generators of the input/output system, (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   17 citations  
  11. C. E. Alchourrón & D. Makinson (1981). New Studies in Deontic Logic. In Risto Hilpinen (ed.), New Studies in Deontic Logic. 125--148.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   36 citations  
  12.  43
    Carlos E. Alchourrón & David Makinson (1985). On the Logic of Theory Change: Safe Contraction. Studia Logica 44 (4):405 - 422.
    This paper is concerned with formal aspects of the logic of theory change, and in particular with the process of shrinking or contracting a theory to eliminate a proposition. It continues work in the area by the authors and Peter Gärdenfors. The paper defines a notion of safe contraction of a set of propositions, shows that it satisfies the Gärdenfors postulates for contraction and thus can be represented as a partial meet contraction, and studies its properties both in general and (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   27 citations  
  13.  16
    David Makinson (1993). Five Faces of Minimality. Studia Logica 52 (3):339 - 379.
    We discuss similarities and residual differences, within the general semantic framework of minimality, between defeasible inference, belief revision, counterfactual conditionals, updating — and also conditional obligation in deontic logic. Our purpose is not to establish new results, but to bring together existing material to form a clear overall picture.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   20 citations  
  14.  25
    George Kourousias & David C. Makinson (2007). Parallel Interpolation, Splitting, and Relevance in Belief Change. Journal of Symbolic Logic 72 (3):994-1002.
    The splitting theorem says that any set of formulae has a finest representation as a family of letter-disjoint sets. Parikh formulated this for classical propositional logic, proved it in the finite case, used it to formulate a criterion for relevance in belief change, and showed that AGMpartial meet revision can fail the criterion. In this paper we make three further contributions. We begin by establishing a new version of the well-known interpolation theorem, which we call parallel interpolation, use it to (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   7 citations  
  15.  5
    Karl Schlechta & David Makinson (2012). Local and Global Metrics for the Semantics of Counterfactual Conditionals. Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logics 4 (2):129-140.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  16.  37
    David Makinson (1985). How to Give It Up: A Survey of Some Formal Aspects of the Logic of Theory Change. Synthese 62 (3):347 - 363.
    The paper surveys some recent work on formal aspects of the logic of theory change. It begins with a general discussion of the intuitive processes of contraction and revision of a theory, and of differing strategies for their formal study. Specific work is then described, notably Gärdenfors'' postulates for contraction and revision, maxichoice contraction and revision functions and the condition of orderliness, partial meet contraction and revision functions and the condition of relationality, and finally the operations of safe contraction and (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   22 citations  
  17.  10
    Carlos E. Alchourrón & David Makinson (1981). Hierarchies of Regulations and Their Logic. In Risto Hilpinen (ed.), New Studies in Deontic Logic. 125--148.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   23 citations  
  18. David Makinson (1994). General Patterns in Nonmonotonic Reasoning. In Handbook of Logic in Artificial Intelligence Nad Logic Programming, Vol. Iii. Clarendon Press
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   15 citations  
  19.  10
    David Makinson & Peter Gärdenfors (1991). Relations Between the Logic of Theory Change and Nonmonotonic Logic. In André Fuhrmann & Michael Morreau (eds.), The Logic of Theory Change. Springer 183--205.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   15 citations  
  20.  27
    D. Makinson (1997). Screened Revision. Theoria 63 (1-2):14-23.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   11 citations  
  21.  3
    D. C. Makinson (1965). ``The Paradox of the Preface". Analysis 25:205-207.
  22.  1
    David Makinson & Leendert Van Der Torre (2000). Input/Output Logics. Journal of Philosophical Logic 29 (4):383 - 408.
    In a range of contexts, one comes across processes resembling inference, but where input propositions are not in general included among outputs, and the operation is not in any way reversible. Examples arise in contexts of conditional obligations, goals, ideals, preferences, actions, and beliefs. Our purpose is to develop a theory of such input/output operations. Four are singled out: simple-minded, basic (making intelligent use of disjunctive inputs), simple-minded reusable (in which outputs may be recycled as inputs), and basic reusable. They (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   10 citations  
  23.  8
    David C. Makinson, Propositional Relevance Through Letter-Sharing.
    The concept of relevance between classical propositional formulae, defined in terms of letter-sharing, has been around for a long time. But it began to take on a fresh life in the late 1990s when it was reconsidered in the context of the logic of belief change. Two new ideas appeared in independent work of Odinaldo Rodrigues and Rohit Parikh: the relation of relevance was considered modulo the choice of a background belief set, and the belief set was put into a (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  24. David Makinson (1994). Handbook of Logic in Artificial Intelligence Nad Logic Programming, Vol. Iii. Clarendon Press.
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   7 citations  
  25.  5
    David Makinson (2003). Bridges Between Classical and Nonmonotonic Logic. Logic Journal of the IGPL 11 (1):69-96.
    The purpose of this paper is to take some of the mystery out of what is known as nonmonotonic logic, by showing that it is not as unfamiliar as may at first sight appear. In fact, it is easily accessible to anybody with a background in classical propositional logic, provided that certain misunderstandings are avoided and a tenacious habit is put aside. In effect, there are logics that act as natural bridges between classical consequence and the principal kinds of nonmonotonic (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   6 citations  
  26.  27
    David Makinson & Leendert van der Torre (2003). Permission From an Input/Output Perspective. Journal of Philosophical Logic 32 (4):391-416.
    Input/output logics are abstract structures designed to represent conditional obligations and goals. In this paper we use them to study conditional permission. This perspective provides a clear separation of the familiar notion of negative permission from the more elusive one of positive permission. Moreover, it reveals that there are at least two kinds of positive permission. Although indistinguishable in the unconditional case, they are quite different in conditional contexts. One of them, which we call static positive permission, guides the citizen (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   6 citations  
  27.  85
    David Makinson (2012). Logical Questions Behind the Lottery and Preface Paradoxes: Lossy Rules for Uncertain Inference. Synthese 186 (2):511-529.
    We reflect on lessons that the lottery and preface paradoxes provide for the logic of uncertain inference. One of these lessons is the unreliability of the rule of conjunction of conclusions in such contexts, whether the inferences are probabilistic or qualitative; this leads us to an examination of consequence relations without that rule, the study of other rules that may nevertheless be satisfied in its absence, and a partial rehabilitation of conjunction as a ‘lossy’ rule. A second lesson is the (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  28.  18
    D. Makinson (1966). On Some Completeness Theorems in Modal Logic. Zeitschrift fur mathematische Logik und Grundlagen der Mathematik 12 (1):379-384.
  29.  9
    David Makinson (1971). Some Embedding Theorems for Modal Logic. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 12 (2):252-254.
  30.  13
    David C. Makinson, On an Inferential Semantics for Classical Logic.
    We seek a better understanding of why an inferential semantics devised by Tor Sandqvist yields full classical logic, by providing and analysing a direct proof via a suitable maximality construction.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  31.  20
    David C. Makinson, Propositional Relevance Through Letter-Sharing: Review and Contribution.
    The concept of relevance between classical propositional formulae, defined in terms of letter-sharing, has been around for a very long time. But it began to take on a fresh life in 1999 when it was reconsidered in the context of the logic of belief change. Two new ideas appeared in independent work of Odinaldo Rodrigues and Rohit Parikh. First, the relation of relevance was considered modulo the belief set under consideration, Second, the belief set was put in a canonical form, (...)
    Translate
      Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  32.  20
    David Makinson & Krister Segerberg (1974). Post Completeness and Ultrafilters. Zeitschrift fur mathematische Logik und Grundlagen der Mathematik 20 (25-27):385-388.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  33.  20
    David Makinson (1986). On the Formal Representation of Rights Relations. Journal of Philosophical Logic 15 (4):403 - 425.
  34.  12
    David Makinson, Gödel’s Master Argument: What is It, and What Can It Do?
    This text is expository. We explain Gödel’s ‘Master Argument’ for incompleteness as distinguished from the 'official' proof of his 1931 paper, highlight its attractions and limitations, and explain how some of the limitations may be transcended by putting it in a more abstract form that makes no reference to truth.
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  35.  30
    David Makinson (1986). How to Give It Up: A Survey of Some Formal Aspects of the Logic of Theory Change. Synthese 68 (1):185 - 186.
    The paper surveys some recent work on formal aspects of the logic of theory change. It begins with a general discussion of the intuitive processes of contraction and revision of a theory, and of differing strategies for their formal study. Specific work is then described, notably Gärdenfors' postulates for contraction and revision, maxichoice contraction and revision functions and the condition of orderliness, partial meet contraction and revision functions and the condition of relationality, and finally the operations of safe contraction and (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   7 citations  
  36.  14
    D. C. Makinson (1969). On the Number of Ultrafilters of an Infinite Boolean Algebra. Zeitschrift fur mathematische Logik und Grundlagen der Mathematik 15 (7-12):121-122.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  37.  5
    David Makinson & Leendert van der Torre (2003). Permission From an Input/Output Perspective. Journal of Philosophical Logic 32 (4):391 - 416.
    Input/output logics are abstract structures designed to represent conditional obligations and goals. In this paper we use them to study conditional permission. This perspective provides a clear separation of the familiar notion of negative permission from the more elusive one of positive permission. Moreover, it reveals that there are at least two kinds of positive permission. Although indistinguishable in the unconditional case, they are quite different in conditional contexts. One of them, which we call static positive permission, guides the citizen (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  38.  24
    David Makinson & Leendert van der Torre (2001). Constraints for Input/Output Logics. Journal of Philosophical Logic 30 (2):155-185.
    In a previous paper we developed a general theory of input/output logics. These are operations resembling inference, but where inputs need not be included among outputs, and outputs need not be reusable as inputs. In the present paper we study what happens when they are constrained to render output consistent with input. This is of interest for deontic logic, where it provides a manner of handling contrary-to-duty obligations. Our procedure is to constrain the set of generators of the input/output system, (...)
    Direct download (10 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  39.  18
    David Makinson & George Kourousias (2006). Respecting Relevance in Belief Change. Análisis Filosófico 26 (1):53-61.
    In this paper dedicated to Carlos Alchourrón, we review an issue that emerged only after his death in 1996, but would have been of great interest to him: To what extent do the formal operations of AGM belief change respect criteria of relevance? A natural criterion was proposed in 1999 by Rohit Parikh, who observed that the AGM model does not always respect it. We discuss the pros and cons of this criterion, and explain how the AGM account may be (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  40.  30
    Carlos E. Alchourrón & David Makinson (1986). Maps Between Some Different Kinds of Contraction Function: The Finite Case. Studia Logica 45 (2):187 - 198.
    In some recent papers, the authors and Peter Gärdenfors have defined and studied two different kinds of formal operation, conceived as possible representations of the intuitive process of contracting a theory to eliminate a proposition. These are partial meet contraction (including as limiting cases full meet contraction and maxichoice contraction) and safe contraction. It is known, via the representation theorem for the former, that every safe contraction operation over a theory is a partial meet contraction over that theory. The purpose (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   5 citations  
  41.  30
    David Makinson (1984). Stenius' Approach to Disjunctive Permission. Theoria 50 (2-3):138-147.
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  42.  18
    David Makinson (1990). The Gärdenfors Impossibility Theorem in Non-Monotonic Contexts. Studia Logica 49 (1):1 - 6.
    Gärdenfors' impossibility theorem draws attention to certain formal difficulties in defining a conditional connective from a notion of theory revision, via the Ramsey test. We show that these difficulties are not avoided by taking the background inference operation to be non-monotonic.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  43.  14
    David Makinson (1981). Non-Equivalent Formulae in One Variable in A Strong Omnitemporal Modal Logic. Zeitschrift fur mathematische Logik und Grundlagen der Mathematik 27 (7):111-112.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  44.  62
    L. Humberstone & D. Makinson (2012). Intuitionistic Logic and Elementary Rules. Mind 120 (480):1035-1051.
    The interplay of introduction and elimination rules for propositional connectives is often seen as suggesting a distinguished role for intuitionistic logic. We prove three formal results concerning intuitionistic propositional logic that bear on that perspective, and discuss their significance. First, for a range of connectives including both negation and the falsum, there are no classically or intuitionistically correct introduction rules. Second, irrespective of the choice of negation or the falsum as a primitive connective, classical and intuitionistic consequence satisfy exactly the (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  45.  14
    David Makinson (1969). Remarks on the Concept of Distribution in Traditional Logic. Noûs 3 (1):103-108.
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  46.  2
    David Makinson (1996). In memoriam carlos eduardo alchourron. Nordic Journal of Philosophical Logic 1 (1):3-10.
    Translate
      Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  47.  25
    David Makinson (1973). A Warning About the Choice of Primitive Operators in Modal Logic. Journal of Philosophical Logic 2 (2):193 - 196.
  48.  20
    David C. Makinson, Completeness Theorems, Representation Theorems: What's the Difference?
    Most areas of logic can be approached either semantically or syntactically. Typically, the approaches are linked through a completeness or representation theorem. The two kinds of theorem serve a similar purpose, yet there also seems to be some residual distinction between them. In what respects do they differ, and how important are the differences? Can we have one without the other? We discuss these questions, with examples from a variety of different logical systems.
    Translate
      Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  49.  18
    David Makinson (1970). A Generalisation of the Concept of a Relational Model for Modal Logic. Theoria 36 (3):331-335.
  50.  27
    David Makinson (1996). Combinatorial Versus Decision-Theoretic Components of Impossibility Theorems. Theory and Decision 40 (2):181-189.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
1 — 50 / 121