Content guidance in formal problem solving processes

In this paper, a formal framework to problem-solving processes is presented. The framework is not complete. Nevertheless, even its present sophistication allows one to see that it is promising. The framework demonstrably allows one to understand scientific change as content-guided. It will be argued that a formal framework is required in order to make definite and precise statements about the content-guided aspects of scientific problem solving.

[1]  Graham Priest,et al.  Minimally inconsistent LP , 1991, Stud Logica.

[2]  Thomas Nickles,et al.  Can Scientific Constraints be Violated Rationally , 1980 .

[3]  Joke Meheus,et al.  Direct dynamic proofs for classical compatibility , 2004 .

[4]  Joke Meheus,et al.  Analogical Reasoning in Creative Problem Solving Processes: Logico-Philosophical Perspectives , 2000 .

[5]  D. Batens,et al.  On Classical Adaptive Logics of Induction , 2003 .

[6]  Diderik Batens,et al.  A Paraconsistent Proof Procedure Based on Classical Logic . Extended , 2003 .

[7]  T. Nickles.  Scientific discovery, case studies , 1980 .

[8]  Andrzej Wiśniewski,et al.  The posing of questions : logical foundations of erotetic inferences , 1995 .

[9]  Diderik Batens.  The Need for Adaptive Logics In Epistemology , 2004, Logic, Epistemology, and the Unity of Science.

[10]  Diderik Batens,et al.  Direct Dynamic Proofs for the Rescher–Manor Consequence Relations: The Flat Case , 2002, J. Appl. Non Class. Logics.

[11]  Diderik Batens,et al.  A Rich Paraconsistent Extension Of Full Positive Logic , 2004 .

[12]  Joke Meheus.  An Adaptive Logic Based on Jaśkowskiˈs Approach to Paraconsistency , 2006, J. Philos. Log..

[13]  Diderik Batens.  A procedural criterion for final derivability in inconsistency-adaptive logics , 2005, J. Appl. Log..

[14]  D. Batens.  TOWARDS THE UNIFICATION OF INCONSISTENCY HANDLING MECHANISMS , 2004 .

[15]  D. Shapere.  Logic and the Philosophical Interpretation of Science , 2004 .

[16]  J. Meheus.  An extremely rich paraconsistent logic and the adaptive logic based on it. , 2000 .

[17]  Diderik Batens.  A Strengthening of the Rescher--Manor Consequence Relations , 2003 .

[18]  Thomas Nickles,et al.  Scientific discovery, logic, and rationality , 1980 .

[19]  Joke Meheus.  Deductive and ampliative adaptive logics as tools in the study of creativity , 1999 .

[20]  Atocha Aliseda,et al.  Abductive Reasoning: Logical Investigations into Discovery and Explanation , 2006 .

[21]  Diderik Batens,et al.  Steering Problem Solving between Cliff Incoherence and Cliff Solitude. , 1996, Philosophica.

[22]  D. Batens,et al.  Pushing the Search Paths in the Proofs. A Study in Proof Heuristics , 2003 .

[23]  Torsten Schaub,et al.  Signed Systems for Paraconsistent Reasoning , 1998, Journal of Automated Reasoning.

[24]  Diderik Batens,et al.  THE THEORY OF THE PROCESS OF EXPLANATION GENERALIZED TO INCLUDE THE INCONSISTENT CASE , 2005, Synthese.

[25]  Diderik Batens.  Do we need a hierarchical model of science , 1992 .

[26]  Jaakko Hintikka,et al.  Inquiry as Inquiry: A Logic of Scientific Discovery , 1999 .

[27]  Diderik Batens,et al.  A survey of inconsistency-adaptive logics , 2000 .

[28]  Diderik Batens.  Inconsistency-Adaptive Logics , 1999 .

[29]  Marek Nasieniewski.  An adaptive logic based on Jaskowski's logic D2 , 2004 .

[30]  Diderik Batens,et al.  A Universal Logic Approach to Adaptive Logics , 2007, Logica Universalis.

[31]  Thomas Nickles,et al.  Introductory Essay: Scientific Discovery and the Future of Philosophy of Science , 1980 .

[32]  Diderik Batens,et al.  The Adaptive Logic of Compatibility , 2000, Stud Logica.

[33]  Joke Meheus.  Adaptive Logics for Question Evocation , 2001 .

[34]  H. Rasiowa,et al.  Logic at work : essays dedicated to the memory of Helena Rasiowa , 1999 .

[35]  Liza Verhoeven.  Proof Theories for Some Prioritized Consequence Relations , 2003 .

[36]  Thomas Nickles,et al.  Reconstructing Science: Discovery and Experiment , 1988 .

[37]  Andrzej Wisniewski,et al.  The logic of questions as a theory of erotetic arguments , 1996, Synthese.

[38]  Diderik Batens.  A formal approach to problem solving. , 2003 .

[39]  Diderik Batens,et al.  An Adaptive Characterization of Signed Systems for Paraconsistent Reasoning , 2006 .

[40]  Anthony Hunter,et al.  Paraconsistent logics , 1998 .

[41]  Andrzej Wiśniewski,et al.  The posing of questions , 1995 .

[42]  Diderik Batens,et al.  Dialectical dynamics within formal logics , 1986 .

[43]  Joke Meheus.  Model-Based Reasoning in Creative Processes , 1999 .

[44]  Diderik Batens,et al.  The Basic Inductive Schema, Inductive Truisms, and the Research-Guiding Capacities of the Logic of Inductive Generalization , 2004 .

[45]  Thomas Nickles,et al.  What is a problem that we may solve it? , 1981, Synthese.

[46]  D. Batens.  A General Characterization of Adaptive Logics , 2001 .

[47]  D. Batens.  Narrowing down suspicion in inconsistent premise sets. , 2006 .

[48]  Joe Cain,et al.  Progress and its problems , 1999 .

[49]  Kristof de Clercq,et al.  Two new strategies for inconsistency-adaptive logics , 2004 .

[50]  D. Batens.  MEANING, ACCEPTANCE AND DIALECTICS* , 1985 .

[51]  J. Meheus.  Adaptive logic in scientific discovery: the case of Clausius , 1993 .