可废止推理
论证理论
可撤销遗产
三维旋转形式
反驳
论证(复杂分析)
非单调逻辑
计算机科学
认识论
逻辑程序设计
模态逻辑
口译(哲学)
语义学(计算机科学)
默认逻辑
人工智能
数学
描述逻辑
程序设计语言
多模态逻辑
情态动词
哲学
自认知逻辑
法学
政治学
生物化学
化学
几何学
高分子化学
作者
Robert Kowalski,Francesca Toni
出处
期刊:Springer eBooks
[Springer Nature]
日期:1996-01-01
卷期号:: 119-140
被引量:3
标识
DOI:10.1007/978-94-011-5668-4_4
摘要
In this paper we explore the thesis that the role of argumentation in practical reasoning in general and legal reasoning in particular is to justify the use of defeasible rules to derive a conclusion in preference to the use of other defeasible rules to derive a conflicting conclusion. The defeasibility of rules is expressed by means of non-provability claims as additional conditions of the rules. We outline an abstract approach to defeasible reasoning and argumentation which includes many existing formalisms, including default logic, extended logic programming, non-monotonic modal logic and auto-epistemic logic, as special cases. We show, in particular, that the 'admissibility' semantics for all these formalisms has a natural argumentation-theoretic interpretation and proof procedure, which seem to correspond well with informal argumentation. In the admissibility semantics there is only one way for one argument to attack another, namely by undermining one of its non-provability claims. In this paper, we show how other kinds of attack between arguments, specifically how rebuttal and priority attacks, can be reduced to the undermining of non-provability claims.
科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI