Reasons as Defaults

Horty, John F.

doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199744077.001.0001

Cited by 184 publications

(88 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This proposal is completely analogous to the one from [23,Chap. 7], where a default logic is proposed that invalidates floating conclusions.…”

Section: Modularity and Variantsmentioning

confidence: 77%

“…23 23 Definition 12 has a game-theoretic flavor to it. In [7], this definition is interpreted as a two-player game in which the proponent has a winning strategy in case she has a reply to every counterargument by her opponent.…”

Section: Definition 12mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Following [28], some have argued that we should accept them just as any other non-monotonic consequence (see also [38]), whereas others have come up with various examples in order to show they are problematic [23]. Consequently, several non-monotonic logics have been modified in order to allow or disallow the derivation of floating conclusions (e.g., [23,37]). …”

Section: Modularity and Variantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Adaptive Logic Characterizations of Input/Output Logic

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract.We translate unconstrained and constrained input/output logics as introduced by Makinson and van der Torre to modal logics, using adaptive logics for the constrained case. The resulting reformulation has some additional benefits. First, we obtain a prooftheoretic (dynamic) characterization of input/output logics. Second, we demonstrate that our framework naturally gives rise to useful variants and allows to express important notions that go beyond the expressive means of input/output logics, such as violations and sanctions.

show abstract

“…This proposal is completely analogous to the one from [23,Chap. 7], where a default logic is proposed that invalidates floating conclusions.…”

Section: Modularity and Variantsmentioning

confidence: 77%

Section: Definition 12mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Modularity and Variantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Adaptive Logic Characterizations of Input/Output Logic

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Por ello sostiene que, en realidad, los ejemplos propuestos no alcanzan para invalidar el restablecimiento. Horty [21], cambiando su postura, también adhiere a que la cuestión radica en cómo se formalizan los casos considerados.…”

Section: Contribucionesunclassified

Restablecimiento y especificidad en Sistemas Argumentativos

Alessio¹

2016

INTARTIF

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Reinstatement is a principle of argumentation systems that enables the justification of a defeated argument when all its defeaters are in turn ultimately defeated. Some counterexamples to reinstatement have been offered in the literature. Specifically, counterexamples suggest that reinstatement cannot be taken as a general principle of defeasible argumentation because the reinstated arguments may support incorrect conclusions. Some authors argued that the problems are not due to reinstatement but to the formalization of those examples. Then, the solution is to make the language expressive enough to obtain the correct results. They also warn that one should avoid tinkering with the formalization in concrete examples just to get a desired outcome. Therefore, this approach should be combined with the search of general principles for choosing the proper formalization. Taking into account that finding general principles of representation could be a hard enterprise, the goal of this thesis is to identify some criterion that allows i. neutralize the counterexamples, ii. preserve the original formal language as much as possible, and iii. maintain reinstatement as a general principle. To identify that criterion, counterexamples are analyzed and possible causes of the problem are detected. As a result it is found that the preference by specificity among arguments can be used to obtain that criterion. Three approaches based on specificity are proposed and evaluated. Two of them introduce alternative defeat relations among arguments. The third one is based on filtering the non maximally specific arguments.

show abstract

“…To get them more interested in deontic logic, we need to show them how the latter one can contribute to the issues they are discussing. The paper (Horty 2007b) by Horty can be seen as an attempt to do it. There the focus is on so-called moral particularism, a justly popular ''cutting-edge'' topic in contemporary ethics that has been most notably defended by the British moral philosopher Dancy (1993Dancy ( , 2006.…”

Section: Moral Particularismmentioning

confidence: 99%

Moral particularism in the light of deontic logic

Parent

2011

Artif Intell Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this paper is to strengthen the point made by Horty about the relationship between reason holism and moral particularism. In the literature prima facie obligations have been considered as the only source of reason holism. I strengthen Horty's point in two ways. First, I show that contrary-to-duties provide another independent support for reason holism. Next I outline a formal theory that is able to capture these two sources of holism. While in simple settings the proposed account coincides with Horty's one, this is not true in more complicated or ''realistic'' settings in which more than two norms collide. My chosen formalism is socalled input/output logic. A bottom-line example is introduced. It raises the issue of whether the conventional wisdom is right in assuming that normative reasons run parallel to epistemic ones.

show abstract

Reasons as Defaults

Cited by 184 publications

References 11 publications

Adaptive Logic Characterizations of Input/Output Logic

Adaptive Logic Characterizations of Input/Output Logic

Restablecimiento y especificidad en Sistemas Argumentativos

Moral particularism in the light of deontic logic

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About