Combining Texts

All the ideas for 'The Case for Closure', 'Dialogue on Things and Words' and 'Non-Monotonic Logic'

expand these ideas     |    start again     |     specify just one area for these texts


16 ideas

2. Reason / E. Argument / 1. Argument
You can 'rebut' an argument's conclusion, or 'undercut' its premises [Antonelli]
3. Truth / A. Truth Problems / 5. Truth Bearers
Truth is a characteristic of possible thoughts [Leibniz]
True and false seem to pertain to thoughts, yet unthought propositions seem to be true or false [Leibniz]
4. Formal Logic / E. Nonclassical Logics / 1. Nonclassical Logics
We infer that other objects are like some exceptional object, if they share some of its properties [Antonelli]
4. Formal Logic / E. Nonclassical Logics / 12. Non-Monotonic Logic
Reasoning may be defeated by new premises, or by finding out more about the given ones [Antonelli]
Should we accept Floating Conclusions, derived from two arguments in conflict? [Antonelli]
Weakest Link Principle: prefer the argument whose weakest link is the stronger [Antonelli]
Non-monotonic core: Reflexivity, Cut, Cautious Monotonicity, Left Logical Equivalence, Right Weakening [Antonelli]
We can rank a formula by the level of surprise if it were to hold [Antonelli]
People don't actually use classical logic, but may actually use non-monotonic logic [Antonelli]
5. Theory of Logic / K. Features of Logics / 10. Monotonicity
In classical logic the relation |= has Monotony built into its definition [Antonelli]
Cautious Monotony ignores proved additions; Rational Monotony fails if the addition's negation is proved [Antonelli]
11. Knowledge Aims / B. Certain Knowledge / 2. Common Sense Certainty
Commitment to 'I have a hand' only makes sense in a context where it has been doubted [Hawthorne]
13. Knowledge Criteria / A. Justification Problems / 2. Justification Challenges / c. Knowledge closure
How can we know the heavyweight implications of normal knowledge? Must we distort 'knowledge'? [Hawthorne]
We wouldn't know the logical implications of our knowledge if small risks added up to big risks [Hawthorne]
Denying closure is denying we know P when we know P and Q, which is absurd in simple cases [Hawthorne]