Towards a Rough Mereology-Based Logic for Approximate Solution Synthesis. Part 1

We are concerned with formal models of reasoning under uncertainty. Many approaches to this problem are known in the literature e.g. Dempster-Shafer theory [29], [42], bayesian-based reasoning [21], [29], belief networks [29], many-valued logics and fuzzy logics [6], non-monotonic logics [29], neural network logics [14]. We propose rough mereology developed by the last two authors [22-25] as a foundation for approximate reasoning about complex objects. Our notion of a complex object includes, among others, proofs understood as schemes constructed in order to support within our knowledge assertions/hypotheses about reality described by our knowledge incompletely.     

Creative reasoning in formal discussion

Systems of formal dialectics articulate methods of conflict resolution. To this end they provide norms to regulate verbal exchanges between the Proponent of a thesis and an Opponent. These regulated exchanges constitute what are known as formal discussions.One may ask what moves, if any, in formal discusions correspond to arguing for or against the thesis. It is claimed that certain moves of the Proponent's are properly designated as arguing for the thesis, and that certain moves of the Opponent purport to criticize the tenability or the relevance of the reasons advanced. Thus the usefulness of formal dialectic systems as models for reasonable argument is vindicated.It is then proposed to make these systems more realistic by incorporating in them a norm of Creative Reasoning that removes the severe restrictions to which the Proponent's arguing was hitherto subject. As a consequence, a certain type of irrelevant reason is no longer automatically excluded. Therefore, it is proposed to extend the Opponent's rights to exert relevance criticism. The new dialectic systems are shown to be strategically equivalent to the original ones. Finally, it is stressed that the Opponent's criticism should not be designated as arguing against the thesis. The Opponent criticizes, but does not argue.     

A “new rhetoric” for a “new dialectic”: Prolegomena to a responsible public argument

This essay offers, as a counterpart to pragma-dialectical argument, a “new rhetoric” produced in the situated discourse of a public forum when a community addresses matters of common urgency and undertakes informed action. Such a rhetoric takes the principles of discourse ethics as its informing dialectic by identifying an interlocutor as one who is obligatedboth to argue effectively,and also to hold open, even reinforce, norms of communicative reason. Implications concerning the study of fallacies and theethos obligations of communicative reasoning are discussed.     

A theory of argumentative understanding: Relationships among position preference,judgments of goodness,memory and reasoning

Data are presented that focus on the nature and development of argumentative reasoning. In particular our study describes how support for or against an issue affects memory for critical parts of an argumentative interaction, judgments of argument goodness, and the content of the reasons given in support of one view versus another. Two other factors were examined: developmental differences in argumentation skill and the conditional nature of supporting one side of an argument across varying contexts. Our results show that even seven year old children can recognize, identify, and use the basic components of an argument to provide evidence for and make judgements about their favored position. Moreover, if position support is held constant across all age groups of students, seven year old children were found to give reasons and explanations that were highly similar in content and principle to college students. The same similarities held across age with respect to biases in memory and judgements of argument goodness. The primary difference between children's and college students' argument behavior lay in the side of an argument the students chose to support. Seven year old children and some eleven yearold children supported positions that impute more value to friendship and social consequences than to the maintenance and advancement of individual rights, as specified in a contract agreement. The similarities and differences across development are discussed with respect to a theory of argumentation that speaks to the importance of understanding the nature of goal conflict and a theory of intentionality in predicting how arguments will be represented and resolved.     

充分条件句语义关系知觉对条件推理的影响

作者通过实验考察了大学生被试对五种充分条件句语义关系知觉对其条件推理的影响。两个实验的结果表明,被试对条件句中前后件之间语义关系的知觉理解影响和调节其相应的条件推理的成绩。实验1新发现,被试对充分条件句后件对前件必要性的知觉理解存在难易差异,对许可句和定义句的后件必要性容易知觉,对偶然句、义务句和因果句的后件必要性难以知觉。实验2新发现,被试对充分条件句后件对前件必要性的知觉理解的难易差异导致被试在否定后件式推理成绩上的差异,对许可句和定义句的否定后件式推理成绩显著高于对偶然句、义务句和因果句的否定后件式推理成绩,对充分条件句否定后件式推理成绩随对后件必要性知觉增加而增加。     

语言类比推理的神经机制：来自ERP研究的证据

实验通过“A:B::C:D”范式, 采用事件相关电位技术, 考察了语言类比推理的神经机制。实验结果显示：图式生成阶段诱发出N400和P300成分, 反映了类比源域的词对概念通达和词对关系抽取的加工过程; 类比映射阶段诱发出N400和晚期负成分LNC, 反映了类比目标域前项词汇概念意义的激活, 以及将已获取的图式关系类比映射于目标域, 并进行推理的加工过程。研究结果表明, 语言类比推理的神经机制复杂, 牵涉到一系列认知加工步骤; LNC成分与类比映射阶段的加工关系密切, 其波幅和头皮分布的广泛性情况与类比映射关系的复杂程度成正比。     

基于能力的类比推理映射转换的实验研究

旨在通过交叉映射的实验研究范式,证明存在一种独立于知识经验的基于能力的映射转换过程。研究结果表明：（1）瑞文高级推理测验的第二组题确实要难于第一组题;被试在转换题上的得分低于非转换题上的得分,转换题的设计效果明显,且表明是否需要进行心理上的转换确实影响了被试的解题成绩;不论题目难度的高低都不影响转换与非转换之间的差异。（2）存在着基于能力的映射转换,并且映射转换能力与析出关系能力之间呈中等程度的线性相关。实验可以区分出析出关系能力高、低的被试和转换能力高、低的被试。     

道德困境之困境—— 情与理的辩争

道德判断是人类日常生活中必不可少的评价性活动之一, 但道德判断中情与理的作用争执不休。从休谟和康德的哲学论争到发展心理学家对道德推理的关注, 直至现代社会心理学家对情绪的重新审视, 道德判断的决策机制已经演变为多种模型相互竞争的局面。在回顾和分析道德判断各种理论的基础上, 阐述了情绪和推理在道德判断中的作用, 认为今后应当更多地关注道德推理的实际作用, 并当运用更为先进的操纵手段, 同时注重情境的影响来考察道德判断中情与理的问题。     

源问题呈现方式对认知负荷及类比推理的影响

采用2×2×2匹配分组实验设计,以176名初中三年级学生为被试,探讨了源问题呈现方式对中学生认知负荷及类比推理的影响。结果表明：（1）归纳、源问题内容相似性和源问题结构清晰性对认知负荷均有显著影响。（2）归纳和源问题结构清晰性对类比推理均有显著影响,且归纳、源问题内容相似性和源问题结构清晰性三者之间在对类比推理的影响上存在交互作用。