The formal characterization of self-deception
نویسنده
چکیده
Awareness is of central interest not only to cognitive scientists but also to computer scientists who are developing models of intelligent, adaptive systems. Self-awareness is a significant aspect of awareness, given that some, at least, of the agents in such systems are capable of representing and reasoning about both the cognitive processes of other agents and also their own. Any comprehensive attempt to analyse and characterize self-awareness will have to consider ways in which it may be constrained, among which, it has often been maintained, self-deception figures prominently, at least in humans. The focus of our ongoing work is the application of logic— specifically modal logics of belief—to the task of formally characterizing a group of types of self-deception. The results so far indicate that it is possible to carry through that task without resorting to paraconsistent logic1 while still making explicit the nature of the apparent inconsistency that self-deception exhibits. They also indicate that the type of belief logic commonly chosen in theoretical artificial intelligence is totally unsuited to this task because it contains strong awareness assumptions as axioms. The latter are usually referred to as the ‘positive introspection axiom’ (the modal schema 4, which in the case of belief says that if an agent believes that p then he believes that he believes that p), and the ‘negative introspection axiom’ (the modal schema 5, which in the case of belief says that if an agent does not believe that p then he believes that he does not believe that p). Consequently, our work focuses on the development of a formal-logical conceptual model, using logics which can formallymodel the critical concepts, so that a small ‘family’ of types of self-deception can be clearly characterized. These include, for instance, the situation in which an agent does not believe that p, but believes that he does believe that p,2 and the situation in which an agent believes that p, but believes that he does not believe that p. The approach taken reflects the methodological position described in a recently published paper,3 in which we argue that—not least in the design of sociotechnical Figure 1. Michel de Montaigne (1533–1592). His remark about selfdeception2 was the point of departure for Jaakko Hintikka’s formallogical analysis in his book ‘Knowledge and Belief.’4 Our work criticizes and develops Hintikka’s approach. (Image credit: c © Georgios Kollidas, Dreamstime.com.)
منابع مشابه
Honesty as a Foundational Virtue According to Islamic Mystical Ethics: Introduction and Definition
Honesty in Islamic mystical ethics, at a superficial level, refers to the correspondence between speech, action, and intention and purpose. This application of honesty has been analyzed in depth in mystical ethics, and the analysis has resulted in honesty being considered as the foundation and basis of other virtues from five aspects, from which it can be understood that many of virtues are not...
متن کاملThe evolution and psychology of self-deception.
In this article we argue that self-deception evolved to facilitate interpersonal deception by allowing people to avoid the cues to conscious deception that might reveal deceptive intent. Self-deception has two additional advantages: It eliminates the costly cognitive load that is typically associated with deceiving, and it can minimize retribution if the deception is discovered. Beyond its role...
متن کاملThe Evolutionary Basis of Self-Deception
Despite its widespread occurrence, self-deception is classified as a form of psychopathology. Because self-deception regularly generates false beliefs, this figures prominently among the motivations for designating self-deception as a form of pathology or malfunction. I argue that this is a poor reason to classify self-deception as a form of psychopathology. From an evolutionary, Darwinian poin...
متن کاملReal self-deception.
Self-deception is made unnecessarily puzzling by the assumption that it is an intrapersonal analog of ordinary interpersonal deception. In paradigmatic cases, interpersonal deception is intentional and involves some time at which the deceiver disbelieves what the deceived believes. The assumption that self-deception is intentional and that the self-deceiver believes that some proposition is tru...
متن کاملFormal Methods of Countering Deception and Misperception in Intelligence Analysis COGNITIVE DOMAIN ISSUES C2 MODELING AND SIMULATION C2 ANALYSIS
The development of formal approaches to intelligence analysis has a wide range of application to both strategic and tactical intelligence analysis within law enforcement, defence, and intelligence communities. The ability of these formal models to mitigate attempted deception by an adversary is affected by many factors, including the choice of analytical model, the type of formal representation...
متن کامل