Synthese 63 (3):275 - 294 (1985)
In this paper we sketch a logic of message and reply. The logic is intended for application in a wide variety of situations, not restricted to the two-person, turn-taking situation. Each message has a body and a vector; the vector specifies the from, to, and the like. To reply to a message, it suffices to give either (1) a complete reply to the body or (2) a corrective reply to at least one presumption derivable from the vector. We discuss the problems of achieving effectiveness and completeness with respect to certain aspects of communication. The results are mixed. In section 9 we argue semi-formally that, in a certain sense, dialogue is necessary. Finally we note that this logic is not a rival of other approaches but may be combinable with them.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
References found in this work BETA
Question-Begging and Cumulativeness in Dialectical Games.John Woods & Douglas Walton - 1982 - Noûs 16 (4):585-605.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
A Lost Horizon: Perils and Possibilities of the Obvious.John J. McDermott - 2010 - The Pluralist 5 (2):1-17.
A Model for Applying Information and Utility Functions.David Harrah - 1963 - Philosophy of Science 30 (3):267-273.
A Reply to the Message of Franz Werfel.Annemarie Hula - 1946 - Thought: A Journal of Philosophy 21 (2):349-352.
A Knowledge Based Semantics of Messages.Rohit Parikh & Ramaswamy Ramanujam - 2003 - Journal of Logic, Language and Information 12 (4):453-467.
I'm OK If You're OK: On the Notion of Trusting Communication. [REVIEW]Ronald Fagin & Joseph Y. Halpern - 1988 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 17 (4):329 - 354.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads29 ( #176,732 of 2,169,071 )
Recent downloads (6 months)5 ( #60,980 of 2,169,071 )
How can I increase my downloads?