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.     

Chaïm Perelman: Justice,argumentation and ancient rhetoric

Theoretical interest in Perelman's thought is linked, for the main part, to the place he accords to the notion of argumentation, defined in his work in reference to the Greek philosophy, as represented by Plato and Aristotle, in contrast to the assertions of the sophists and rhetors. He separates the notion of demonstration and that of argumentation and supports his position on an analysis of the debates which were common in the sophistic and rhetoric period.It is in different ways that the notion of argumentation comes into the work of Perelman. By taking up again the analysis of justice with the aim of removing the various strata of meaning which had accumulated on it as a result of the reductions of Plato and the dialectical analyses of Aristotle, Perelman showed that the theory of argumentation transcends the domain of right in which it is rooted and ought not be abandoned to lawyers only. Thus, he follows a train of thought to which he accords a certain nobilty in the name of the new rhetoric. This manner of considering the relationship of the moderns to the Greeks leads him to set up the notion of argumentation in his own texts, where it demonstrates a logical retreat which enables him to work back from Aristotle to Plato and from him to the rhetors and sophists, whose discourse is defined on the level of the self-referential.The exemplary character of Perelman's work is on account of this rehabilitation of argumentation in the old rhetoric which will be examined here.A slightly different version of this essay was presented at the Third Intenational Philosophy Symposium on Justice, Athens, 22–27 May 1987.     

Hoisted by their own petards: Philosophical positions that self-destruct

Philosophers have not resisted temptation to transgress against the logic of their own conceptual structures. Self-undermining position-taking is an occupational hazard. Philosophy stands in need of conceptual therapy.The author describes three conceptions of philosophy: the narcissistic, disputatious, and therapeutic. (i) Narcissistic philosophy is hermetic, believing itself to contain all evidence that can possibly be relevant to it. Philosophy undertaken in this spirit has led to defensive, monadically isolated positions. (ii) Disputatious philosophies are fundamentally question-begging, animated by assumptions that philosophical adversaries reject. (iii) The intention of therapeutic philosophy is to study philosophical positions from the standpoint of their internal consistency, or lack of it. In particular, its interest is in positions that either compel assent, because they cannot be rejected without self-referential inconsistency, or self-destruct because self-referential inconsistency cannot be avoided. The article's focus is on the latter. Several examples of self-undermining positions are drawn from the history of philosophy, exemplifying two main varieties of self-referential inconsistency: pragmatical and projective.     

The disputation — a special type of cooperative argumentative dialogue

This article consists of three parts, two introductory, in which the limits and the methods of analysis of dialogues are expounded, and the major part, in which the main features of a philosophical theory of disputation are outlined.

Reasoning Is for Arguing: Understanding the Successes and Failures of Deliberation

Theoreticians of deliberative democracy have sometimes found it hard to relate to the seemingly contradictory experimental results produced by psychologists and political scientists. We suggest that this problem may be alleviated by inserting a layer of psychological theory between the empirical results and the normative political theory. In particular, we expose the argumentative theory of reasoning that makes the observed pattern of findings more coherent. According to this theory, individual reasoning mechanisms work best when used to produce and evaluate arguments during a public deliberation. It predicts that when diverse opinions are discussed, group reasoning will outperform individual reasoning. It also predicts that individuals have a strong confirmation bias. When people reason either alone or with like‐minded peers, this confirmation bias leads them to reinforce their initial attitudes, explaining individual and group polarization. We suggest that the failures of reasoning are most likely to be remedied at the collective than at the individual level.     

生命性在句子加工中作用的ERP研究

生命性广泛地渗透到人类语言系统中发挥其作用。本文主要结合最新和经典的有关生命性的ERP研究探讨了生命性信息起作用的模式和时间进程。在句子加工过程中,生命性影响论元的加工并影响题元结构的建构和解释。以往研究表明,生命性违反有时引发的是N400效应,有时引发的是P600效应,少数情况还表现出N400-P600的双相模式。生命性在句子加工中的作用还跟多种变量存在交互作用,语境、题元可逆性、论元之间的语义关系、动词类型和其固有的题元结构都可能影响生命性信息起作用的模式。文章最后进行总结和展望,并提出未来研究仍有必要继续探讨生命性信息加工的时间神经动态性及其在句子加工中的具体作用机制。     

The influence of thinking dispositions on integration and recall of multiple texts

We investigated the association between thinking dispositions and two outcomes of multiple-texts comprehension: integration of conflicting information in argumentative essays; and recall of inferential information as an index of deep comprehension. We focused on two thinking dispositions, need for cognition (NFC) and actively open-minded thinking (AOT), as relevant individual differences in the processes involved in multiple-texts comprehension. NFC is the tendency to engage in and enjoy cognitively demanding activities, whereas AOT is the tendency to rationally evaluate arguments and supporting evidence, without being influenced by biases from one's own prior beliefs and prior knowledge. 73 university students completed perceived topic knowledge, perceived exposure to argumentative writing, and perceived competence in argumentative writing, NFC and AOT questionnaires, read two contradictory texts, wrote an argumentative essay, and recalled the information read 1 month later. Argumentative essays were assessed by length and level of integration of conflicting perspective. Text recalls were assessed by number of valid inferences included. Research questions were investigated through a path analysis model. The path analysis model had a good fit. NFC was indirectly associated with argumentation quality of the essay via the essay length. AOT was directly associated with the inferences included in the recall task. The present study contributes to the literature on multiple-texts comprehension by emphasizing the role of thinking dispositions.     

线索提示对物理问题表征的影响

考察了复杂物理问题解决中图形线索提示和参数线索提示的作用,结果表明,在难度较大的物理问题中,单一的图形线索提示未给学生带来太大的帮助,而参数线索提示有助于学生搜索到有效算子.讨论了专家在物理问题解决过程中的特点,认为专家的优势之一在于比新手更善于发现关键的线索,能够根据关键线索找到合适的原理来完整地表征问题.