Incompatibility Semantics from Agreement

In this paper, I discuss the analysis of logic in the pragmatic approach recently proposed by Brandom. I consider different consequence relations, formalized by classical, intuitionistic and linear logic, and I will argue that the formal theory developed by Brandom, even if provides powerful foundational insights on the relationship between logic and discursive practices, cannot account for important reasoning patterns represented by non-monotonic or resource-sensitive inferences. Then, I will present an incompatibility semantics in the framework of linear logic which allow to refine Brandom’s concept of defeasible inference and to account for those non-monotonic and relevant inferences that are expressible in linear logic. Moreover, I will suggest an interpretation of discursive practices based on an abstract notion of agreement on what counts as a reason which is deeply connected with linear logic semantics.     

Drafting a Partnership Agreement

No abstract available for this article.     

The Objection from Cognitive Agreement

Philosophical Studies -     

Agreement Theorems in Dynamic-Epistemic Logic

This paper introduces Agreement Theorems to dynamic-epistemic logic. We show first that common belief of posteriors is sufficient for agreement in epistemic-plausibility models, under common and well-founded priors. We do not restrict ourselves to the finite case, showing that in countable structures the results hold if and only if the underlying plausibility ordering is well-founded. We then show that neither well-foundedness nor common priors are expressible in the language commonly used to describe and reason about epistemic-plausibility models. The static agreement result is, however, finitely derivable in an extended modal logic. We provide the full derivation. We finally consider dynamic agreement results. We show they have a counterpart in epistemic-plausibility models, and provide a new form of agreements via public announcements.     

Extensive Philosophical Agreement and Progress

This article argues, first, that there is plenty of agreement among philosophers on philosophically substantive claims, which fall into three categories: reasons for or against certain views, elementary truths regarding fundamental notions, and highly conditionalized claims. This agreement suggests that there is important philosophical progress. It then argues that although it's easy to list several potential kinds of philosophical progress, it is much harder to determine whether the potential is actual. Then the article attempts to articulate the truth that the deniers of philosophical progress are latching on to. Finally, it comments on the significance of the agreement and (potential) progress.     

Agreement and Updating For Self-Locating Belief

In this paper, I argue that some plausible principles concerning which credences are rationally permissible for agents given information about one another’s epistemic and credal states have some surprising consequences for which credences an agent ought to have in light of self-locating information. I provide a framework that allows us to state these constraints and draw out these consequences precisely. I then consider and assess the prospects for rejecting these prima facie plausible principles.     

Interjudge Agreement of Draw-A-Person Diagnostic Impressions

Summary

The interjudge agreement of Draw-A-Person (DAP)-based diagnostic impressions was assessed. Twenty-four psychologists were asked to categorize 48 DAP protocols as being the productions of organics, paranoid schizophrenics, non-paranoid schizophrenics or normal controls. The mean between-judges proportion of agreement was only .41 and the mean proportion correct was a mere .28. (A proportion of .25 could be anticipated in each case by chance.) Strength of interjudge agreement did not vary with the extent to which judges utilized the test but did seem dependent upon the subjects' diagnoses. The results indicated that diagnostic impressions based on the DAP alone seem to be neither usefully valid nor impressively consistent across psychologists. It is suggested that the profession is due for a re-evaluation of its DAP training techniques and its use of the test.     

手术同意书的相关法律问题

医患双方都非常重视手术同意书 ,从法理角度分析 ,手术同意书是患者知情同意权利和医方告知义务的体现 ;符合民事法律要件的合法有效的手术同意书 ,证明了医患之间告知与知情同意权的实现。对手术同意书的法律性质及法律效力进行探究 ,有助于维护医患双方的合法权利     

Agreement between Two Independent Groups of Raters

We propose a coefficient of agreement to assess the degree of concordance between two independent groups of raters classifying items on a nominal scale. This coefficient, defined on a population-based model, extends the classical Cohen’s kappa coefficient for quantifying agreement between two raters. Weighted and intraclass versions of the coefficient are also given and their sampling variance is determined by the Jackknife method. The method is illustrated on medical education data which motivated the research.     

评分者内部一致性的研究和应用

在行为科学的研究和实践中,研究者常常需要将个体层次的评价,整合到群体层次的评价,对于这种自下而上整合模式的一致性问题,国内一些学者常常错误地使用评分者内部信度作为评分者内部一致性的指标。评分者内部一致性和评分者内部信度不仅在理论基础上存在差异,而且在实践中也存在前者很高(或很低),而后者却很低(或很高)的不一致情况。文章阐述了学术界对评分一致性这一问题的提出、争论和取得一致观点的发展脉络,以期学者们对这一问题能够有深入的思索,避免在今后的研究中出现类似的错误。     

论手术同意书的性质及其效力

关于手术同意书的法律性质,我国理论界主要存在着合同说、授权说和医疗文书说三种不同的理论.从民法基本理论出发,采用比较分析的方法,指出合同说和授权说理论上的不足,对医疗文书说的合理性进行了充分的论证,并在此基础上,结合我国侵权责任法的相关规定,对手术同意书的法律效力予以初步界定.     

手术协议中的医生义务

手术协议是外科最常见和病历资料中必不可少的医疗文书之一,是手术前医患双方充分交流、沟通的平台,也是患者行使知情同意权和医生履行法律义务的载体.手术协议中体现了四种医生义务:谨慎注意、积极预见、充分告知和取得同意.     

Producing and Recognizing Analogical Relations

Analogical reasoning is an important component of intelligent behavior, and a key test of any approach to human language and cognition. Only a limited amount of empirical work has been conducted from a behavior analytic point of view, most of that within Relational Frame Theory (RFT), which views analogy as a matter of deriving relations among relations. The present series of four studies expands previous work by exploring the applicability of this model of analogy to topography-based rather than merely selection-based responses and by extending the work into additional relations, including nonsymmetrical ones. In each of the four studies participants pretrained in contextual control over nonarbitrary stimulus relations of sameness and opposition, or of sameness, smaller than, and larger than, learned arbitrary stimulus relations in the presence of these relational cues and derived analogies involving directly trained relations and derived relations of mutual and combinatorial entailment, measured using a variety of productive and selection-based measures. In Experiment 1 participants successfully recognized analogies among stimulus networks containing same and opposite relations; in Experiment 2 analogy was successfully used to extend derived relations to pairs of novel stimuli; in Experiment 3 the procedure used in Experiment 1 was extended to nonsymmetrical comparative relations; in Experiment 4 the procedure used in Experiment 2 was extended to nonsymmetrical comparative relations. Although not every participant showed the effects predicted, overall the procedures occasioned relational responses consistent with an RFT account that have not yet been demonstrated in a behavior-analytic laboratory setting, including productive responding on the basis of analogies.