Intuitionistic Autoepistemic Logic

In this paper we address the problem of combining a logic with nonmonotonic modal logic. In particular we study the intuitionistic case. We start from a formal analysis of the notion of intuitionistic consistency via the sequent calculus. The epistemic operator M is interpreted as the consistency operator of intuitionistic logic by introducing intuitionistic stable sets. On the basis of a bimodal structure we also provide a semantics for intuitionistic stable sets.     

Question-begging and infinite regress

InMetaphysics , Ch. 4, Aristotle speaks of both infinite regress and question-begging, but does not explicitly relate them. We get the impression that he thinks that to use one of these arguments to avoid the other is to jump from the frying-pan into the fire. This relationship is illustrated in terms of the ignorant belief that everything can be proved, and of attempts to prove the Law of Noncontradiction.     

Learning from the law to address uncertainty in the precautionary principle

Environmentalists have advocated the Precautionary Principle (PP) to help guide public and private decisions about the environment. By contrast, industry and its spokesmen have opposed this. There is not one principle, but many that have been recommended for this purpose. Despite the attractiveness of a core idea in all versions of the principle—that decision-makers should take some precautionary steps to ensure that threats of serious and irreversible damage to the environment and public health do not materialize into harm—even one of the most widely endorsed principles needs considerable specification and refinement before it can be used. Moreover, the PP is an approach or guide to utilizing scientific evidence in social or legal decision-making contexts. In this it does not differ in kind from other approaches to using factual information such as in the law. The law provides some models for different strategies to guide decision-making under uncertainty when factual issues cannot be resolved with certainty. These in turn can help guide the formulation of different versions of PP and help clarify some presuppositions of the principle. Once some plausible versions of PP are articulated, I suggest some applications to existing environmental problems.     

An Operational Logic of Proofs with Positive and Negative Information

The logic of proofs was introduced by Artemov in order to analize the formalization of the concept of proof rather than the concept of provability. In this context, some operations on proofs play a very important role. In this paper, we investigate some very natural operations, paying attention not only to positive information, but also to negative information (i.e. information saying that something cannot be a proof). We give a formalization for a fragment of such a logic of proofs, and we prove that our fragment is complete and decidable.     

论八卦是八个逻辑范式

基于太极代数,本文证明八卦是八个逻辑范式,八卦中包含四对矛盾关系,其中"六子"构成辩证逻辑组。八卦是生命生产和思想生产都必须共同遵循的变化法则。学界似有这样的倾向,以为《周易》中只有类推逻辑而没有演绎逻辑,本文证明这种观点是不能成立的。八卦本质上就是演绎逻辑的,卦象的本质是逻辑法则。因此,基于卦象的联想或推理不能脱离八卦的逻辑内涵;否则,想象的灵活性必将导致卦象上的混淆,甚至使八卦沦为象数游戏的工具。     

2002年:中国医疗纠纷处理的重大转折

2002年4月1日开始实施的《最高人民法院关于民事诉讼证据的若干规定》,要求医院对医疗行为与损害的因果关系和不存在医疗过错承担举证责任,一时间,医院对此忿忿不平,百姓对此拍手叫好,4月15日,期待已久的《国务院医疗事故处理条例》缍正式颁布,与1987年颁布的《医疗事故处理办法》相比有了重大改变,中国医疗纠纷的处理在2002年发生了重大转折,对此进行了详细分析,与大多数人的观点不同,认为前者恰恰对医院有利,而后者对医院更为严格。     

Beweislastverteilung und Intuitionen in philosophischen Diskursen

Allocating the burden of proof and intuitions in philosophical disputes.– This paper criticises the view that in philosophical disputes the onus probandi rests on those who advance a position that contradicts our basic intuitions. Such a rule for allocating the burden of proof may be an adequate reconstruction of everyday justification, but is unreasonable in the area of philosophy. In philosophy it is not only difficult to determine the plausibility of a proposition, at the same time contradictory claims may be equally plausible. – In contrast to such common sense proposals I try to show that in philosophical disputes the burden of proof does not depend on the material content of speech acts. A speaker simply bears the burden of proof for a proposition p if he has asserted that p and has agreed to justify it. This revised version was published online in August 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

Underdetermination and provability: a reply to Olaf Müller

Newton claims to have proven the heterogeneity of light through his experimentum crucis. However, Olaf Müller has worked out in detail Goethe’s idea that one could likewise prove the heterogeneity of darkness by inverting Newton’s famous experiment. Müller concludes that this invalidates Newton’s claim of proof. Yet this conclusion only holds if the heterogeneity of light and the heterogeneity of darkness is logically incompatible. This paper shows that this is not the case. Instead, in Quine’s terms, we have two logically compatible theories based on mutually irreducible theoretical terms. From a Quinean point of view, this does no harm to the provability of the corresponding statements.