The purpose of this paper is to question some commonly accepted patterns of reasoning involving nonmonotonic logics that generate multiple extensions. In particular, I argue that the phenomenon of floating conclusions indicates a problem with the view that the skeptical consequences of such theories should be identified with the statements that are supported by each of their various extensions.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
A Conditional Logic for Abduction.Mathieu Beirlaen & Atocha Aliseda - 2014 - Synthese 191 (15):3733-3758.
The Three Faces of Defeasibility in the Law.Henry Prakken & Giovanni Sartor - 2004 - Ratio Juris 17 (1):118-139.
Defeasible Conditionalization.Paul D. Thorn - 2014 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 43 (2-3):283-302.
Two Aggregation Paradoxes in Social Decision Making: The Ostrogorski Paradox and the Discursive Dilemma.Gabriella Pigozzi - 2005 - Episteme 2 (2):119-128.
Similar books and articles
Skeptical Theism, Moral Skepticism, and Divine Deception.Joshua Seigal - 2010 - Forum Philosophicum: International Journal for Philosophy 15 (2):251-274.
On Higher-Order and Free-Floating Chances.Justin C. Fisher - 2006 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 57 (4):691-707.
Skeptical Parasitism and the Continuity Argument.Brian Ribeiro - 2004 - Metaphilosophy 35 (5):714-732.
Well-Founded Semantics for Defeasible Logic.Frederick Maier & Donald Nute - 2010 - Synthese 176 (2):243 - 274.
The Cognitive Processes in Informal Reasoning.Victoria F. Shaw - 1996 - Thinking and Reasoning 2 (1):51 – 80.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads37 ( #133,162 of 2,143,766 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #280,273 of 2,143,766 )
How can I increase my downloads?
There are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.