Advanced

From reasonable preferences, via argumentation, to logic

JACOT, JUSTINE LU ; Genot, Emmanuel LU and Zenker, Frank LU (2016) In Journal of Applied Logic 18. p.105-128
Abstract
This article demonstrates that typical restrictions which are imposed in dialogical logic in order to recover first-order logical consequence from a fragment of natural language argumentation are also forthcoming from preference profiles of boundedly rational players, provided that these players instantiate a specific player type and compute partial strategies. We present two structural rules, which are formulated similarly to closure rules for tableaux proofs that restrict players' strategies to a mapping between games in extensive forms (i.e., game trees) and proof trees. Both rules are motivated from players' preferences and limitations; they can therefore be viewed as being player-self-imposable. First-order logical consequence is thus... (More)
This article demonstrates that typical restrictions which are imposed in dialogical logic in order to recover first-order logical consequence from a fragment of natural language argumentation are also forthcoming from preference profiles of boundedly rational players, provided that these players instantiate a specific player type and compute partial strategies. We present two structural rules, which are formulated similarly to closure rules for tableaux proofs that restrict players' strategies to a mapping between games in extensive forms (i.e., game trees) and proof trees. Both rules are motivated from players' preferences and limitations; they can therefore be viewed as being player-self-imposable. First-order logical consequence is thus shown to result from playing a specific type of argumentation game. The alignment of such games with the normative model of the Pragma-dialectical theory of argumentation is positively evaluated. But explicit rules to guarantee that the argumentation game instantiates first-order logical consequence have now become gratuitous, since their normative content arises directly from players' preferences and limitations. A similar naturalization for non-classical logics is discussed. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
keywords
Pragma-dialectics
in
Journal of Applied Logic
volume
18
pages
105 - 128
publisher
Elsevier
external identifiers
  • Scopus:84988353946
ISSN
1570-8683
DOI
10.1016/j.jal.2016.08.001
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
872b5c1c-ece6-422a-8888-1d988a393779
alternative location
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S157086831630043X
date added to LUP
2016-10-02 11:57:45
date last changed
2016-11-07 15:01:14
@misc{872b5c1c-ece6-422a-8888-1d988a393779,
  abstract     = {This article demonstrates that typical restrictions which are imposed in dialogical logic in order to recover first-order logical consequence from a fragment of natural language argumentation are also forthcoming from preference profiles of boundedly rational players, provided that these players instantiate a specific player type and compute partial strategies. We present two structural rules, which are formulated similarly to closure rules for tableaux proofs that restrict players' strategies to a mapping between games in extensive forms (i.e., game trees) and proof trees. Both rules are motivated from players' preferences and limitations; they can therefore be viewed as being player-self-imposable. First-order logical consequence is thus shown to result from playing a specific type of argumentation game. The alignment of such games with the normative model of the Pragma-dialectical theory of argumentation is positively evaluated. But explicit rules to guarantee that the argumentation game instantiates first-order logical consequence have now become gratuitous, since their normative content arises directly from players' preferences and limitations. A similar naturalization for non-classical logics is discussed.},
  author       = {JACOT, JUSTINE and Genot, Emmanuel and Zenker, Frank},
  issn         = {1570-8683},
  keyword      = {Pragma-dialectics},
  language     = {eng},
  pages        = {105--128},
  publisher    = {ARRAY(0x91552d8)},
  series       = {Journal of Applied Logic},
  title        = {From reasonable preferences, via argumentation, to logic},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jal.2016.08.001},
  volume       = {18},
  year         = {2016},
}