Logics for Collective Reasoning

نویسنده

  • Daniele Porello
چکیده

In this paper, we discuss the approach based on Social Choice Theory and Judgment Aggregation to the definition of collective reasoning. We shall make explicit the aggregative nature of the notion of collective reasoning that is defined in the Judgment Aggregation account and we shall stress that the notion of logical coherence plays a fundamental role in defining collective attitudes. Unfortunately, as several results in Judgment Aggregation show, coherence is not compatible with fair aggregation procedures. On closer inspection, the notion of coherence that is jeopardized by Judgment Aggregation is based on classical logic. In this work, we propose to revise the standard view of rationality of Judgment Aggregation by exploring the realm of non-classical logics. in particular, we will present possibility results for substructural logics. Those logics, we argue, provide a viable notion of collective reasoning.

برای دانلود متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

ثبت نام

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

منابع مشابه

A Proof-Theoretical View of Collective Rationality

The impossibility results in judgement aggregation show a clash between fair aggregation procedures and rational collective outcomes. In this paper, we are interested in analysing the notion of rational outcome by proposing a proof-theoretical understanding of collective rationality. In particular, we use the analysis of proofs and inferences provided by linear logic in order to define a fine-g...

متن کامل

Paraconsistent Reasoning for Semantic Web Agents

Description logics refer to a family of formalisms concentrated around concepts, roles and individuals. They are used in many multiagent and Semantic Web applications as a foundation for specifying knowledge bases and reasoning about them. Among them, one of the most important logics is SROIQ, providing the logical foundation for the OWL 2 Web Ontology Language recommended by W3C in October 200...

متن کامل

Non-monotonic reasoning with normative conflicts in multi-agent deontic logic

We present proof-theoretical and semantical characterizations of two multi-agent deontic logics for dealing with normative conflicts. The resulting logics PMDL and PMDL are non-standard in at least two respects. First, they are nonclassical in the sense that they invalidate some inferences of the propositional fragment of Classical Logic (CL). Consequently, they also invalidate certain inferenc...

متن کامل

Possibilistic Residuated Implication Logics and Applications

In this paper, we will develop a class of logics for reasoning about qualitative and quantitative uncertainty. The semantics of the logics is uniformly based on possibility theory. Each logic in the class is parameterized by a t-norm operation on 0,1], and we express the degree of implication between the possibilities of two formulas explicitly by using residuated implication with respect to th...

متن کامل

Logics for Modelling Collective Attitudes

We introduce a number of logics to reason about collective propositional attitudes that are defined by means of the majority rule. It is well known that majoritarian aggregation is subject to irrationality, as the results in social choice theory and judgment aggregation show. The proposed logics for modelling collective attitudes are based on a substructural propositional logic that allows for ...

متن کامل

ذخیره در منابع من


  با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید

برای دانلود متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

ثبت نام

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

عنوان ژورنال:

دوره   شماره 

صفحات  -

تاریخ انتشار 2014