Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Logic for Describing Strong Belief-Disagreement Between Agents

  • Published:
Studia Logica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The result of an interaction is influenced by its epistemic state, and several epistemic notions are related to multiagent situations. Strong belief-disagreement on a certain proposition between agents means that one agent believes the proposition and the other believes its negation. This paper presents a logical system describing strong belief-disagreement between agents and demonstrates its soundness and completeness. The notion of belief-disagreement as well as belief-agreement can facilitate gaining a clearer understanding of the acts of trade and speech.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Aumann, R. J., Agreeing to disagree, The Annals of Statistics 6: 1236–1239, 1976.

  2. Fagin, R., Y. Moses, J. Y. Halpern and M. Y. Vardi, Reasoning about knowledge, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass., and London, England, 2003.

  3. Humberstone, I. L., The logic of non-contingency, Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 36: 214–229, 1995.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Humberstone, I. L., The modal logic of agreement and noncontingency, Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 43: 95–127, 2002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Kuhn, S. T., Minimal non-contingency logic, Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 36: 230–234, 1995.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Lewis, D., Convention: A Philosophical Study, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1969.

  7. Marcos, J., Logics of essence and accident, Bulletin of the Section of Logic 34: 43–56, 2005.

  8. Montgomery, H., and R. Routley, Contingency and non-contingency bases for normal modal logics, Logique et Analyse 9: 318–328, 1966.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Montgomery, H., and R. Routley, Modalities in a sequence of normal non-contingency modal systems, Logique et Analyse 12: 225–227, 1969.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Pan, T., On logic of belief-disagreement among agents, in H. P. van Ditmarsch, J. Lang, S. Ju (eds.), Logic, Rationality, and Interaction: Third International Workshop, LORI 2011, Guangzhou, China, October 10–13, 2011. Proceedings, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2011, pp. 392–393.

  11. Steinsvold, C., Completeness for various logics of essence and accident, Bulletin of the Section of Logic 37: 93–101, 2008.

  12. Zolin, E., Completeness and definability in the logic of non-contingency, Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 40: 533–547, 1999.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Zolin, E., Sequential reflexive logics with a non-contingency operator, Mathematical Notes 72: 784–798, 2002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Philosophy, Nanjing University, Nanjing, China

    Jia Chen & Tianqun Pan

Authors
  1. Jia Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tianqun Pan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tianqun Pan.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Chen, J., Pan, T. Logic for Describing Strong Belief-Disagreement Between Agents. Stud Logica 106, 35–47 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11225-017-9724-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11225-017-9724-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation