A Dialectical Approach for Argument-Based Judgment Aggregation
نویسندگان
چکیده
The current paper provides a dialectical interpretation of the argumentation-based judgment aggregation operators of Caminada and Pigozzi. In particular, we define discussion-based proof procedures for the foundational concepts of down-admissible and up-complete. We then show how these proof procedures can be used as the basis of dialectical proof procedures for the sceptical, credulous and super credulous judgment aggregation operators.
منابع مشابه
Argumentation structures that integrate dialectical and non-dialectical reasoning
Argumentation concepts have been applied to numerous knowledge engineering endeavours in recent years. For example, a variety of logics have been developed to represent argumentation in the context of a dialectical situation such as a dialogue. In contrast to the dialectical approach, argumentation has also been used to structure knowledge. This can be seen as a non-dialectical approach. The To...
متن کاملComputer-assisted safety argument review - a dialectics approach
There has been increasing use of argument-based approaches in the development of safetycritical systems. Within this approach, a safety case plays a key role in the system development life cycle. The key components in a safety case are safety arguments, which are designated to demonstrate that the system is acceptably safe. Inappropriate reasoning in safety arguments could undermine a system’s ...
متن کاملDouglas N . Walton University of Winnipeg Fabrizio Macagno Catholic University of Milan Types of Dialogue , Dialectical Relevance and
Using tools like argument diagrams and profiles of dialogue, this paper studies a number of examples of everyday conversational argumentation where determination of relevance and irrelevance can be assisted by means of adopting a new dialectical approach. According to the new dialectical theory, dialogue types are normative frameworks with specific goals and rules that can be applied to convers...
متن کاملInformal Logic and the Dialectical Approach to Argument
Undoubtedly, Ralph H. Johnson and J. Anthony Blair are two of the patriarchs of informal logic (IL), and they remain its most recognized exponents. The informal logic movement initially began as a rejection of the tools of formal logic as an effective means of analysing and evaluating everyday reasoning and argumentation. As it developed, IL began to adopt a dialectical conception of its subjec...
متن کاملJudgment Aggregation in Abstract Dialectical Frameworks
Abstract dialectical frameworks (ADFs) are a knowledge representation formalism introduced as a generalisation of Dung’s abstract argumentation frameworks (AFs) by Gerhard Brewka and coauthors. We look at a judgment aggregation problem in ADFs, namely the problem of aggregating a profile of complete interpretations. We generalise the family of interval aggregation methods, studied in the AF cas...
متن کامل