On Inferences from Inconsistent Premises

Theory and Decision 1 (2):179-217, 1970-1971 (1970)

Nicholas Rescher
University of Pittsburgh
The main object of this paper is to provide the logical machinery needed for a viable basis for talking of the ‘consequences’, the ‘content’, or of ‘equivalences’ between inconsistent sets of premisses.With reference to its maximal consistent subsets (m.c.s.), two kinds of ‘consequences’ of a propositional set S are defined. A proposition P is a weak consequence (W-consequence) of S if it is a logical consequence of at least one m.c.s. of S, and P is an inevitable consequence (I-consequence) of S if it is a logical consequence of all the m.c.s. of S. The set of W-consequences of a set S it determines (up to logical equivalence) its m.c.s. (This enables us to define a normal form for every set such that any two sets having the same W-consequences have the same normal form.) The W-consequences and I-consequences will not do to define the ‘content’ of a set S. The first is too broad, may include propositions mutually inconsistent, the second is too narrow. A via media between these concepts is accordingly defined: P is a P-consequence of S, where P is some preference criterion yielding some of the m.c.s. of S as preferred to others, and P is a consequence of all of the P-preferred m.c.s. of S. The bulk of the paper is devoted to discussion of various preference criteria, and also surveys the application of this machinery in diverse contexts - for example, in connection with the processing of mutually inconsistent reports
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/BF00154005
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 38,992
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Logic Based Merging.Sébastien Konieczny & Ramón Pino Pérez - 2011 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 40 (2):239-270.
A Curious Dialogical Logic and its Composition Problem.Sara L. Uckelman, Jesse Alama & Aleks Knoks - 2014 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 43 (6):1065-1100.
Measuring Inconsistency.Kevin Knight - 2002 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 31 (1):77-98.

View all 26 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

How Falsity Dispels Fallacies.Mary R. Newsome & P. N. Johnson-Laird - 2006 - Thinking and Reasoning 12 (2):214 – 234.
Narrowing Down Suspicion in Inconsistent Premise Sets.Diderik Batens - 2006 - Poznan Studies in the Philosophy of the Sciences and the Humanities 91 (1):185-209.
A Base Logic for Default Reasoning.Beihai Zhou & Yi Mao - 2006 - Frontiers of Philosophy in China 1 (4):688-709.
The Logic of Conditionals.Ernest Adams - 1965 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 8 (1-4):166 – 197.


Added to PP index

Total views
84 ( #84,919 of 2,319,702 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
3 ( #446,517 of 2,319,702 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Monthly downloads

My notes

Sign in to use this feature