Monotonicity and reasoning with exceptions

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

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.

Details

Authors
External organisations
  • University of Hamburg
Research areas and keywords

Subject classification (UKÄ) – MANDATORY

  • Philosophy

Keywords

  • Default logic, Defeasible reasoning, Exceptions, Monotonicity
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)227-236
Number of pages10
JournalArgumentation
Volume20
Issue number2
Publication statusPublished - 2006 Oct
Publication categoryResearch
Peer-reviewedYes
Externally publishedYes