A Defeasible Calculus for Zetetic Agents

被引:5
作者
Millson, Jared [1 ]
机构
[1] Calif State Univ Bakersfield, Dept Philosophy & Religious Studies, Bakersfield, CA 93311 USA
关键词
inquiry; erotetic logic; defeasible reasoning; logical AI;
D O I
10.12775/LLP.2020.019
中图分类号
B81 [逻辑学(论理学)];
学科分类号
010104 ; 010105 ;
摘要
The study of defeasible reasoning unites epistemologists with those working in AI, in part, because both are interested in epistemic rationality. While it is traditionally thought to govern the formation and (with)holding of beliefs, epistemic rationality may also apply to the interrogative attitudes associated with our core epistemic practice of inquiry, such as wondering, investigating, and curiosity. Since generally intelligent systems should be capable of rational inquiry, AI researchers have a natural interest in the norms that govern interrogative attitudes. Following its recent coinage, we use the term "zetetic" to refer to the properties and norms associated with the capacity to inquire. In this paper, we argue that zetetic norms can be modeled via defeasible inferences to and from questions - a.k.a erotetic inferences - in a manner similar to the way norms of epistemic rationality are represented by defeasible inference rules. We offer a sequent calculus that accommodates the unique features of "erotetic defeat" and that exhibits the computational properties needed to inform the design of zetetic agents. The calculus presented here is an improved version of the one presented in (Millson, 2019), extended to cover a new class of defeasible erotetic inferences.
引用
收藏
页码:3 / 37
页数:35
相关论文
共 34 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 1958, Australasian Journal of Philosophy, DOI DOI 10.1080/00048405885200211
[2]  
Belnap N., 1976, The Logic of Questions and Answers
[3]  
Bloser Claudia, 2013, Defeasibility in Philosophy: Knowledge, Agency, Responsibility, and the Law
[4]  
Bolotov A., 2006, ARTIF INTELL, P505
[5]  
Burda Y., 2018, INT C LEARN REPR
[6]   Automated Generation of Erotetic Search Scenarios: Classification, Optimization, and Knowledge Extraction [J].
Chlebowski, Szymon ;
Komosinski, Maciej ;
Kups, Adam .
ACM TRANSACTIONS ON COMPUTATIONAL LOGIC, 2017, 18 (02)
[7]  
Ciardelli Ivano, 2018, Inquisitive Semantics
[8]   Rational endorsement [J].
Fleisher, Will .
PHILOSOPHICAL STUDIES, 2018, 175 (10) :2649-2675
[9]  
Friedman J., PHILOS REV
[10]   Inquiry and Belief [J].
Friedman, Jane .
NOUS, 2019, 53 (02) :296-315