Some arguments are probably valid: Syllogistic reasoning as communication
نویسندگان
چکیده
Syllogistic reasoning lies at the intriguing intersection of natural and formal reasoning, of language and logic. Syllogisms comprise a formal system of reasoning yet use natural language quantifiers, and invite natural language conclusions. How can we make sense of the interplay between logic and language? We develop a computational-level theory that considers reasoning over concrete situations, constructed probabilistically by sampling. The base model can be enriched to consider the pragmatics of natural language arguments. The model predictions are compared with behavioral data from a recent meta-analysis. The flexibility of the model is then explored in a data set of syllogisms using the generalized quantifiers most and few. We conclude by relating our model to two extant theories of syllogistic reasoning – Mental Models and Probability Heuristics.
منابع مشابه
Completeness Theorems for Syllogistic Fragments
Traditional syllogisms involve sentences of the following simple forms: All X are Y , Some X are Y , No X are Y ; similar sentences with proper names as subjects, and identities between names. These sentences come with the natural semantics using subsets of a given universe, and so it is natural to ask about complete proof systems. Logical systems are important in this area due to the prominenc...
متن کاملAn Abductive Reasoning Approach to the Belief Bias Effect
The tendency to accept or reject arguments based on own beliefs or prior knowledge rather than on the reasoning process is called the belief-bias effect. A psychological syllogistic reasoning task shows this phenomenon, wherein participants were asked whether they accept or reject a given syllogism. We discuss one case which is commonly assumed to be believable but not logically valid. By intro...
متن کاملThe probability heuristics model of syllogistic reasoning.
A probability heuristic model (PHM) for syllogistic reasoning is proposed. An informational ordering over quantified statements suggests simple probability based heuristics for syllogistic reasoning. The most important is the "min-heuristic": choose the type of the least informative premise as the type of the conclusion. The rationality of this heuristic is confirmed by an analysis of the proba...
متن کاملSolving Valid Syllogistic Problems using a Bidirectional Heteroassociative Memory
Classical syllogistic reasoning, also known as Aristotelian reasoning, is of particular interest in cognition. Such reasoning, which can seem simple at first, is known to be associated with high error rates. Although some research has been done on this topic, the underlying mechanisms used by human beings remain largely unknown. To understand the underlying cognitive properties associated with ...
متن کاملCan natural language semantics explain syllogistic reasoning?
It has long been known that conversion of the quantifiers can explain syllogistic reasoning errors (Newstead, 1989; Revlis, 1975; Wilkins, 1928). Geurts is more concerned with explaining how people solve valid syllogisms, and an integral part of his model is the (entirely legal) conversion of ‘no’ and ‘some’. This part of Geurts’ theory seems unexceptionable, but more problematic is his assumpt...
متن کامل