Fecha: 6 de Mayo de 2013, 13hrs
Lugar: Sala de Investigadores Fernando Salmerón, Instituto de Investigaciones Filosóficas, UNAM.
Resumen: When formalizing conflicting information, various strategies are open to us. I will present two such strategies. One is to formalize a conflict as a formula of the form 'A&~A' and to use a paraconsistent negation connective in order to prevent the conflict from trivializing the premises. Another is to use modal operators for shielding off the conflicting data.
Whichever strategy we use, I will argue that we need a non-monotonic logic for faithfully representing our reasoning in the presence of conflicting information, and will illustrate this by means of two adaptive logics that each follow one of the strategies above. I conclude with some tentative remarks on the relation of these non-monotonic logics to the nature of inference and heuristics.
Mathieu Beirlaen - Tolerating Normative Conflicts in Deontic Logic
Diderik Batens - A Universal Logic Approach to Adaptive Logics
Lou Goble - Multiplex Semantics for Deontic Logic