Abstract
In this paper we want to examine how the mutual understanding of speakers is reached during a conversation through collaborative processes, and what role is played by abductive inference (in the Peircean sense) in these processes. We do this by bringing together contributions coming from a variety of disciplines, such as logic, philosophy of language and psychology. When speakers are engaged in a conversation, they refer to a supposed common ground: every participant ascribes to the others some knowledge, belief, opinion etc. on which to rely in order to reach mutual understanding. As the conversation unfolds, this common ground is continually corrected and reshaped by the interchanges. An abductive reasoning takes place, in a collaborative setting, in order to build new possible theories about the common ground. In reconstructing this process through the use of a working example, we argue that the integration of a collaborative perspective within the Peircean theory of abduction can help to solve some of the drawbacks that the critics of the latter have outlined, for example its permissivity and non generativity.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Addis, T., Billinge, D., & Visscher, B. (2004). Socially sensitive computing: A necessary paradigm shift for computer science. In Grand challenges in computing (pp. 1–6). Newcastle: UK CPHC.
Addis, T., Townsend-Addis, J., Billinge, D., Gooding, D. C., & Visscher, B. (2005). The adductive loop: Tracking irrational sets. In MBR 2004, Pavia, Italy (This Volume).
Arrighi, C. (2004). Meaning as a product of negotiation. Master’s Thesis, Philosophy Department, Stanford University.
Arrighi C. and Ferrario R. (2005). The dynamic nature of meaning. In: Magnani, L. and Dossena, R. (eds) Computing., philosophy and cognition, pp 295–312. King’s College Publications, London
Clark H.H. (1996). Using language. Cambridge University Press, New York
Clark H.H. and Wilkes-Gibbs D. (1986). Referring as a collaborative process. Cognition, 22: 1–39
Davidson D. (1982). Rational animals. Dialectica, 36: 317–327
Davidson, D. (1986). A nice derangement of epitaphs. In R. Grandy & R. Warner (Eds.), Philosophical grounds of rationality (pp. 433–446). Oxford University Press.
Davidson, D. (1991). Three varieties of knowledge. In Subjective, intersubjective, objective (pp. 205–220). Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Davidson, D. (1992). The second person. In Subjective, intersubjective, objective (pp. 107–122). Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Føllesdal, D. (1982). Intentionality and behaviorism. In L. J. Cohen, J. Los, H. Pfeiffer, & K.-P. Podewski (Eds.), Proocedings of the 6th International Congress of Logic, Methodology and Philosophy of Science, Hannover August 22–29, 1979. Amsterdam: North Holland.
Føllesdal D. (1995). In what sense is language public?. In: Leonardi, P. (eds) On Quine: New essays, pp. Cambridge University Press, New York
Grice H.P. (1969). Utterer’s meaning and intentions. The Philosophical Review, 78: 147–177
Hartshorne, C., & Weiss, P. (Eds.). (1931–1958). Peirce, Charles Sanders. Collected Papers. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Hintikka J. (1976). Language-games. Acta Philosophica Finnica, XXVIII(1–3): 105–125
Hintikka J. (1998). What is abduction? The fundamental problem of contemporary epistemology. Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society, 34(3): 503–533
Lewis D. (1969). Convention: A philosophical study. Harvard University Press, Cambridge
Magnani L. (2004). Model-based and manipulative abduction in science. Foundations of Science, 9: 219–247
Oltramari A. and Borgo S. et al (2003). Negoziati di significato. Sistemi Intelligenti, 2003(3): 419–428
Paavola S. (2004). Abduction as a logic and methodology of discovery: The importance of strategy. Foundations of Science, 9(3): 267–283
Paavola, S., Hakkarainen, K., & Sintonen, M. (2005). Abduction with dialogical and trialogical means. In MBR 2004. Pavia, Italy.
Rapaport W.J. (2003). What did you mean by that? Misunderstanding, negotiation and syntactic semantics. Minds and Machines, 13(3): 397–427
Vadera, S., Rodriguez, A., Succar, E., & Wu, J. (2005). Using Wittgenstein’s family resemblance principle to learn exemplars. In MBR 2004, Pavia, Italy (This Volume).
Wilson N. (1959). Substances without substrata. Review of Metaphysics, 12(4): 521–539
Wirth U. (1999). Abductive reasoning in Peirce’s and Davidson’s account of interpretation. Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society, 35(1): 115–128
Wittgenstein L. (1958). Philosophical investigations. The Macmillan Company, New York
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Arrighi, C., Ferrario, R. Abductive Reasoning, Interpretation and Collaborative Processes. Found Sci 13, 75–87 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10699-007-9117-4
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10699-007-9117-4