A new experimental method to identify the process of logical reasoning

Abstract: A new method to identify the process of logical reasoning is presented. In spite of its indispensability and importance, we have had few methods to identify a subject's reasoning process, except that of using verbal protocol data. In this paper, for the purpose of objective identification of the reasoning process, we propose a new method to obtain the subject's reasoning process, in terms of a resolution tree for a task of which the logical structure can be written by first-order predicate logic. The results of an experiment using this method are presented. They revealed some interesting features of human reasoning such as, large differences between subjects, remarkable parallel processes, and the existence of subgoals for each subject.     

What Russell Couldn't Describe

There is currently debate between deflationists and anti-deflationists about the ontology of persisting objects. Some deflationists think that disputes between, for example, four-dimensionalists (e.g. Ted Sider and David Lewis) and quasi-nihilists (e.g. Peter Van Inwagen and Trenton Merricks) are merely verbal disputes. Anti-deflationists deny this. Eli Hirsch is a deflationist who maintains that many ontological disputes are merely verbal. Theodore Sider maintains that the disputes are not merely verbal. Hirsch and Sider are thus engaged in a metaontological dispute. In this paper, I argue that Hirsch's metaontological dispute with Sider is, by Hirsch's own lights, itself merely verbal. I conclude that the mere verbalness of his metaontological dispute with Sider suggests that Hirsch's account of what makes a dispute merely verbal may be problematic.     

A sequent calculus for a logic of contingencies

We introduce a sequent calculus that is sound and complete with respect to propositional contingencies, i.e., formulas which are neither provable nor refutable. Like many other sequent and natural deduction proof systems, this calculus possesses cut elimination and the subformula property and has a simple proof search mechanism.     

Chunk and Permeate,a Paraconsistent Inference Strategy. Part I: The Infinitesimal Calculus

In this paper we introduce a paraconsistent reasoning strategy, Chunk and Permeate. In this, information is broken up into chunks, and a limited amount of information is allowed to flow between chunks. We start by giving an abstract characterisation of the strategy. It is then applied to model the reasoning employed in the original infinitesimal calculus. The paper next establishes some results concerning the legitimacy of reasoning of this kind – specifically concerning the preservation of the consistency of each chunk – and concludes with some other possible applications and technical questions.     

Gentzen-Type Methods for Bilattice Negation

A general Gentzen-style framework for handling both bilattice (or strong) negation and usual negation is introduced based on the characterization of negation by a modal-like operator. This framework is regarded as an extension, generalization or re- finement of not only bilattice logics and logics with strong negation, but also traditional logics including classical logic LK, classical modal logic S4 and classical linear logic CL. Cut-elimination theorems are proved for a variety of proposed sequent calculi including CLS (a conservative extension of CL) and CLS_cw (a conservative extension of some bilattice logics, LK and S4). Completeness theorems are given for these calculi with respect to phase semantics, for SLK (a conservative extension and fragment of LK and CLS_cw, respectively) with respect to a classical-like semantics, and for SS4 (a conservative extension and fragment of S4 and CLScw, respectively) with respect to a Kripke-type semantics. The proposed framework allows for an embedding of the proposed calculi into LK, S4 and CL.     

Reduction and emergence in the physical sciences: Reply to Rueger

I analyse Rueger’s application of Kim’s model of functional reduction to the relation between the thermal conductivities of metal bars at macroscopic and atomic scales. 1) I show that it is a misunderstanding to accuse the functional reduction model of not accounting for the fact that there are causal powers at the micro-level which have no equivalent at the macro-level. The model not only allows but requires that the causal powers by virtue of which a functional predicate is defined, are only a subset of the causal powers of the properties filling the functional specification. 2) The fact that the micro-equation does not converge to the macro-equation in general but only under the constraint of a “solvability condition” does not show that reduction is impossible, as Rueger claims, but only that reduction requires inter-level constraints. 3) Rueger tries to analyse inter-level reduction with the conceptual means of intra-level reduction. This threatens the coherence of his analysis, given that it makes no sense to ascribe macroproperties such as thermal conductivity to entities at the atomic level. Ignoring the distinction between theses two senses of “reduction” is especially confusing because they have opposite directions: in intra-level reduction, the more detailed account reduces to the less detailed one, whereas in inter-level reduction, the less detailed theory is reduced to the more detailed one. 4) Finally I criticize Rueger’s way of using Wimsatt’s criteria for emergence in terms of non-aggregativity, to construct a concept of synchronic emergence. It is wrong to require, over and above non-aggregativity, irreducibility as a criterion for emergence.     

Towards a Semantic Characterization of Cut-Elimination

We introduce necessary and sufficient conditions for a (single-conclusion) sequent calculus to admit (reductive) cut-elimination. Our conditions are formulated both syntactically and semantically.     

Cut Elimination inside a Deep Inference System for Classical Predicate Logic

Deep inference is a natural generalisation of the one-sided sequent calculus where rules are allowed to apply deeply inside formulas, much like rewrite rules in term rewriting. This freedom in applying inference rules allows to express logical systems that are difficult or impossible to express in the cut-free sequent calculus and it also allows for a more fine-grained analysis of derivations than the sequent calculus. However, the same freedom also makes it harder to carry out this analysis, in particular it is harder to design cut elimination procedures. In this paper we see a cut elimination procedure for a deep inference system for classical predicate logic. As a consequence we derive Herbrand's Theorem, which we express as a factorisation of derivations.     

A Phenomenological Calculus for Anisotropic Systems

The phenomenological calculus is a relational paradigm for complex systems, closely related in substance and spirit to Robert Rosen’s own approach. Its mathematical language is multilinear algebra. The epistemological exploration continues in this paper, with the expansion of the phenomenological calculus into the realm of anisotropy.