Abductive Reasoning, Interpretation and Collaborative Processes

In this paper we want to examine how the mutual understanding of speakers is reached during a conversation through collaborative processes, and what role is played by abductive inference (in the Peircean sense) in these processes. We do this by bringing together contributions coming from a variety of disciplines, such as logic, philosophy of language and psychology. When speakers are engaged in a conversation, they refer to a supposed common ground: every participant ascribes to the others some knowledge, belief, opinion etc. on which to rely in order to reach mutual understanding. As the conversation unfolds, this common ground is continually corrected and reshaped by the interchanges. An abductive reasoning takes place, in a collaborative setting, in order to build new possible theories about the common ground. In reconstructing this process through the use of a working example, we argue that the integration of a collaborative perspective within the Peircean theory of abduction can help to solve some of the drawbacks that the critics of the latter have outlined, for example its permissivity and non generativity.

[1]  Intentionality and Behaviorism , 1982 .

[2]  Uwe Wirth Abductive Reasoning in Peirce's and Davidson's Account of Interpretation , 1999 .

[3]  Sami Paavola,et al.  Abduction as a Logic and Methodology of Discovery: the Importance of Strategies , 2004 .

[4]  Jaakko Hintikka,et al.  What is Abduction? The Fundamental Problem of Contemporary Epistemology , 1999 .

[5]  N. L. Wilson Substances Without Substrata , 1959 .

[6]  Lorenzo Magnani,et al.  Model-Based and Manipulative Abduction in Science , 2004 .

[7]  Philip R. Cohen,et al.  Referring as a Collaborative Process , 2003 .

[8]  B. Litowitz The Second Person , 2007, Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association.

[9]  William J. Rapaport,et al.  What Did You Mean by That? Misunderstanding, Negotiation, and Syntactic Semantics , 2003, Minds and Machines.

[10]  Using Wittgenstein’s Family Resemblance Principle to Learn Exemplars , 2008 .

[11]  J. Leroy Folks Peirce, Charles Sanders , 2005 .

[12]  T. Addis,et al.  Socially Sensitive Computing : A Necessary Paradigm Shift for Computer Science , 2005 .

[13]  D. Davidson,et al.  Three Varieties of Knowledge , 1991, Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement.

[14]  Nicola Guarino,et al.  Negoziati di significato , 2003 .

[15]  Sami Paavola,et al.  Abduction with Dialogical and Trialogical Means , 2006, Log. J. IGPL.

[16]  Philosophical Grounds of Rationality , 1990 .

[17]  S. Hurley,et al.  Rational Animals ? , 2004 .

[18]  R. Kirk CONVENTION: A PHILOSOPHICAL STUDY , 1970 .

[19]  H. Grice Utterer's meaning and intentions , 1969 .

[20]  R. Ferrario,et al.  The dynamic nature of meaning , 2005 .

[21]  David Lewis Convention: A Philosophical Study , 1986 .

[22]  Tom Addis,et al.  The Abductive Loop: Tracking Irrational Sets , 2008 .

[23]  Paolo Leonardi,et al.  On Quine: New Essays , 1997 .