Monotonicity and reasoning with exceptions

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review


A proposal by Ferguson [2003, Argumentation 17, 335-346] for a fully monotonic argument form allowing for the expression of defeasible generalizations is critically examined and rejected as a general solution. It is argued that (i) his proposal reaches less than the default-logician's solution allows, e.g., the monotonously derived conclusion is one-sided and itself not defeasible. (ii) when applied to a suitable example, his proposal derives the wrong conclusion. Unsuccessful remedies are discussed.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)227-236
Number of pages10
Issue number2
Publication statusPublished - 2006 Oct
Externally publishedYes

Subject classification (UKÄ)

  • Philosophy


  • Default logic
  • Defeasible reasoning
  • Exceptions
  • Monotonicity


Dive into the research topics of 'Monotonicity and reasoning with exceptions'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this