A conditional logic for abduction
- 385 Downloads
We propose a logic of abduction that (i) provides an appropriate formalization of the explanatory conditional, and that (ii) captures the defeasible nature of abductive inference. For (i), we argue that explanatory conditionals are non-classical, and rely on Brian Chellas’s work on conditional logics for providing an alternative formalization of the explanatory conditional. For (ii), we make use of the adaptive logics framework for modeling defeasible reasoning. We show how our proposal allows for a more natural reading of explanatory relations, and how it overcomes problems faced by other systems in the literature.
KeywordsAbduction Adaptive logics Conditional logic Non-monotonic logic
Research for this article was partially supported by the project “Logics of discovery, heuristics and creativity in the sciences” (PAPIIT, IN400514-3) granted by the National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM). We are greatly indebted to the Dirección General de Asuntos del Personal Académico (UNAM) and to the Programa de Becas Posdoctorales de la Coordinación de Humanidades (UNAM). We also thank Laura Leonides and two anonymous referees for their many helpful comments and suggestions regarding this paper.
- Aliseda, A. (2006). Abductive reasoning logical investigations into discovery and explanations. Berlin: Springer, Synthese Library.Google Scholar
- Batens, D. (2000). A survey of inconsistency-adaptive logics. In D. Batens, G. Priest, & J-Pl van Bendegem (Eds.), Frontiers of paraconsistent logic (pp. 49–73). Baldock: Research Studies Press, Kings College Publication.Google Scholar
- Douven, I. (2011). Abduction. In E. N. Zalta (Ed), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2011 ed.). http://plato.stanford.edu/cgi-bin/encyclopedia/archinfo.cgi?entry=abduction.
- Gauderis, T. (2013). Modelling abduction in science by means of a modal adaptive logic. Foundations of Science, 18(4), 611–624.Google Scholar
- Hintikka, J. (1998). What is abduction? the fundamental problem of contemporary epistemology. Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society, 34, 503–533.Google Scholar
- Hobbs, Jerry R. (2008). Abduction in natural language understanding. In L. Horn & G. Ward (Eds.), The handbook of pragmatics (pp. 724–741). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.Google Scholar
- Magnani, L. (Ed.) (2013). Special issue on formal representations in model-based reasoning and abduction. Logic Journal of the IGPL, 21(6), 931–942Google Scholar
- Marquis, P. (1991). Extending abduction from propositional to first-order logic. In Fundamentals of Artificial Intelligence Research (Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 535), (pp. 141–155). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
- Niiniluoto, I. (2000). Hempel’s theory of statistical explanation. In J. H. Fetzer (Ed.), Science, explanation, and rationality: The philosophy of Carl G. Hempel (pp. 138–163). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Peirce, C. S. (1932–1958). In P. Weiss, C. Hartshorne, & A. W. Burk (Eds.). Collected papers of Charles Sanders Peirce (Vols. 1–8). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. (Abbreviated CP).Google Scholar
- Psillos, S. (2002). Causation and explanation. Stocksfield: Acumen Publishing Limited.Google Scholar
- Psillos, S. (2002). Simply the best: a case for abduction. In A. C. Kakas & F. Sadri (Eds.), Computational logic: Logic programming and beyond (pp. 605–625). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
- Salmon, W. (1990). Four decades of scientific explanation. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
- Straßer, C. (2014). Trends in Logic.Adaptive Logics for Defeasible Reasoning, Vol. 38. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
- Thagard, P. (1988). Computational Philosophy of Science. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Touretzky, D. S., Horty, F. J., & Thomason, R. H., (1987). A clash of intuitions: The current state of nonmonotonic multiple inheritance systems’. In Proceedings of the IJCAl-87 (pp. 476–482). Burlington, MA: Morgan Kaufmann.Google Scholar
- Van De Putte, F., & Straßer, C. (2013). Three formats of prioritized adaptive logics: A comparative study. Logic Journal of the IGPL, 22, 127–159.Google Scholar
- van Fraassen, B. (1980). The scientific image. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
- Verdée, P. (2009). Adaptive logics using the minimal abnormality strategy are \(\pi ^1_1\)-complex. Synthese, 167, 93–104.Google Scholar