Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Four dialogue systems

  • Published:
Studia Logica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The paper describes four dialogue systems, developed in the tradition of Charles Hamblin. The first system provides an answer for Achilles in Lewis Carroll's parable, the second an analysis of the fallacy of begging the question, the third a non-psychologistic account of conversational implicature, and the fourth an analysis of equivocation and of objections to it. Each avoids combinatorial explosions, and is intended for real-time operation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. L. Carroll [Charles Dodgson]; What the Tortoise said to Achilles, Mind n.s. 4 (1895), pp. 278–280.

  2. J. Habermas, Theory and Practice, trans. John Viertel, Boston, Mass., Beacon 1973.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Ch. L. Hamblin, Fallacies, London, Methuen 1970.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Ch. L. Hamblin, Mathematical models of dialogue, Theoria 37 (1971), pp. 130–155.

    Google Scholar 

  5. D. Lewis, Scorekeeping in a language game, Journal of Philosophical Logic 8 (1979), pp. 339–359.

    Google Scholar 

  6. D. Lewis, Logic for equivocators, Nous 16 (1982), pp. 431–441.

    Google Scholar 

  7. T. S. Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, 2nd edn. Chicago, University of Chicago Press 1970.

    Google Scholar 

  8. A. M. Maciver, Some questions about “know” and “think”, Analysis 5.3 (1938), pp. 43–50.

    Google Scholar 

  9. J. Mackenzie, How to stop talking to Tortoises, Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 20 (1979), pp. 705–717.

    Google Scholar 

  10. J. Mackenzie, Why do we number theorems? Australasian Journal of Philosophy 58 (1980), pp. 135–149.

    Google Scholar 

  11. J. Mackenzie, Begging the question in dialogue, Australasian Journal of Philosophy 62 (1984), pp. 174–181.

    Google Scholar 

  12. J. Mackenzie, Confirmation of a conjecture of Peter of Spain concerning question-begging arguments, Journal of Philosophical Logic 13 (1984), pp. 35–45.

    Google Scholar 

  13. J. Mackenzie, I guess, Australasian Journal of Philosophy 65 (1987), pp. 290–300.

    Google Scholar 

  14. J. Mackenzie, Distinguo: the response to equivocation, Argumentation 2 (1988), pp. 465–482.

    Google Scholar 

  15. J. Woods and D. Walton, Question-begging and cumulativeness in dialectical games, Nous 16 (1982), pp. 585–605.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. SPSE/Education, University of Sydney, 2006, Australia

    Jim Mackenzie

Authors
  1. Jim Mackenzie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Mackenzie, J. Four dialogue systems. Studia Logica 49, 567–583 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00370166

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00370166

Keywords

Search

Navigation