Argumentation and Abduction in Dialogical Logic

This chapter advocates for a reconciliation of argumentation theory and formal logic in an agent-centered theory of reasoning, that is, a theory in which inferences are studied as human activities. First, arguments in favor of a divorce between the two fields are presented. Those arguments are not so controversial. However, rather than forcing a radical separation, they urge logicians to rethink the object of their studies. Arguments cannot be analyzed as objects independent from human activity, whether it is dealt with deductive or nondeductive reasoning. The present analysis naturally takes place in the context of dialogical logic in which the proof process and the semantics are conceived in terms of argumentative games, which involve the agents, their commitments and their actions. This work focuses first on deductive reasoning and then takes abduction as a case of nondeductive reasoning. By relying on some relevant ideas of the Gabbay–Woods (GW) schema of abduction and Aliseda’s approach, a new dialogical explanation of abduction in terms of concession-problem is proposed. This notion of concession problem will be defined thereafter. With respect to the topics of the model-based sciences, the question of the specificity of the speech act by means of which a hypothesis is conjectured is set more specifically.

[1]  P. Lorenzen.  Einführung in die operative Logik und Mathematik , 1955 .

[2]  Victor Goldschmidt,et al.  28. Perelman (Ch.) et Olbrechts-Tyteca (L.). La nouvelle rhétorique ; Traité de l'Argumentation (Coll. Logos). Paris, Presses Universitaires de France, 1958 , 1958 .

[3]  Arthur N. Prior,et al.  The Runabout Inference-Ticket , 1960 .

[4]  J. Searle.  Expression and Meaning: The logical status of fictional discourse , 1975 .

[5]  J. Searle.  Expression and Meaning: Studies in the Theory of Speech Acts , 1979 .

[6]  John McCarthy,et al.  Circumscription - A Form of Non-Monotonic Reasoning , 1980, Artif. Intell..

[7]  Raymond Reiter,et al.  A Logic for Default Reasoning , 1987, Artif. Intell..

[8]  W. Richard Stark.  A Logic of Knowledge , 1981, Math. Log. Q..

[9]  Erik C. W. Krabbe,et al.  From axiom to dialogue , 1982 .

[10]  Peter Gärdenfors,et al.  On the logic of theory change: Partial meet contraction and revision functions , 1985, Journal of Symbolic Logic.

[11]  Jeroen Groenendijk,et al.  Dynamic predicate logic , 1991 .

[12]  Victor W. Marek,et al.  Nonmonotonic logic - context-dependent reasoning , 1997, Artificial intelligence.

[13]  Shahid Rahman,et al.  Über Dialogue protologische Kategorien und andere Seltenheiten , 1993 .

[14]  D. Walton,et al.  Commitment in Dialogue: Basic Concepts of Interpersonal Reasoning , 1995 .

[15]  Shahid Rahman,et al.  Dialogues and Ontology, the Dialogical Approach to Free Logic , 1997 .

[16]  Shahid Rahman,et al.  The dialogical dynamics of adaptive paraconsistency. , 2002 .

[17]  F. H. Eemeren,et al.  A Systematic Theory of Argumentation: The pragma-dialectical approach , 2003 .

[18]  W. van der Hoek,et al.  An Introduction to Dynamic Epistemic Logic , 2004 .

[19]  Paul Gochet,et al.  The Dynamic Turn in Twentieth Century Logic , 2002, Synthese.

[20]  Erik C. W. Krabbe,et al.  Formal systems of dialogue rules , 1985, Synthese.

[21]  Shahid Rahman,et al.  Dialogical Connexive Logic , 2001, Synthese.

[22]  Shahid Rahman,et al.  On How to Be a Dialogician , 2005, Logic, Thought and Action.

[23]  Dov M. Gabbay,et al.  The Reach of Abduction , 2005 .

[24]  Dov M. Gabbay,et al.  Advice on Abductive Logic , 2006, Log. J. IGPL.

[25]  Diderik Batens,et al.  A Formal Logic for Abductive Reasoning , 2006, Log. J. IGPL.

[26]  L. Magnani.  Logic and Abduction: Cognitive Externalizations in Demonstrative Environments , 2009, THEORIA.

[27]  Frans H. van Eemeren,et al.  Argumentative Indicators in Discourse, A Pragma-Dialectical Study , 2007, Argumentation Library.

[28]  J. Woods.  Fictions and their Logic , 2007 .

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

[30]  A. Baltag,et al.  EPISTEMIC LOGIC AND INFORMATION UPDATE , 2008 .

[31]  Shahid Rahman,et al.  On Dialogues and Natural Deduction , 2009 .

[32]  J.F.A.K. van Benthem,et al.  One logician's perspective on argumentation , 2009 .

[33]  Shahid Rahman,et al.  From Games to Dialogues and Back , 2009, Games: Unifying Logic, Language, and Philosophy.

[34]  Shahid Rahman,et al.  Negation in the Logic of First Degree Entailment and Tonk , 2012, The Realism-Antirealism Debate in the Age of Alternative Logics.

[35]  Shahid Rahman,et al.  Constructive Type Theory and the Dialogical Approach to Meaning , 2013 .

[36]  James B. Freeman,et al.  Errors of Reasoning. Naturalizing the Logic of Inference , 2013 .

[37]  Shahid Rahman.  Prefacio: Negación y los orígenes de la lengua escrita. (prefacio para C. Barés Gómez Lógica dinámica epistémica para la evidencialidad negativa. Las partículas negativas en ugarítico). , 2013 .

[38]  S. Magnier.  Approche dialogique de la dynamique épistémique et de la condition juridique , 2013 .

[39]  Ángel Nepomuceno-Fernández,et al.  An epistemic and dynamic approach to abductive reasoning: Abductive problem and abductive solution , 2013, J. Appl. Log..

[40]  Johan van Benthem,et al.  Logical Dynamics of Information and Interaction , 2014 .

[41]  Nicolas Clerbout,et al.  First-Order Dialogical Games and Tableaux , 2014, J. Philos. Log..

[42]  J. Woods,et al.  Psychologizing the Semantics of Fiction , 2014 .

[43]  Mathieu Beirlaen,et al.  A conditional logic for abduction , 2014, Synthese.

[44]  Shahid Rahman,et al.  Fiction, Creation and Fictionality : An Overview , 2014 .