Welcome to the upgraded MacSphere! We're putting the finishing touches on it; if you notice anything amiss, email macsphere@mcmaster.ca

Material Consequence and Counter-Factuals

dc.contributor.authorHitchcock, Daviden_US
dc.date.accessioned2014-06-17T19:50:15Z
dc.date.available2014-06-17T19:50:15Z
dc.date.created2013-05-18en_US
dc.date.issued2013en_US
dc.description<p>This paper was presented at a conference, Virtues of Argumentation, sponsored by the Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation, and held at the University of Windsor from May 23-25. It is expected to be published in a CD of the proceedings.</p>en_US
dc.description.abstract<p>A conclusion is a “material consequence” of reasons if it follows necessarily from them in accordance with a valid form of argument with content. The corresponding universal generalization of the argument’s associated conditional must be true, must be a covering generalization, and must be true of counter-factual instances. But it need not be law-like. Pearl’s structural model semantics is easier to apply to such counter-factual instances than Lewis’s closest-worlds semantics, and gives intuitively correct results.</p>en_US
dc.identifier.otherphilosophy_coll/3en_US
dc.identifier.other1005en_US
dc.identifier.other4154355en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11375/5647
dc.subjectassociated conditionalen_US
dc.subjectclosest-world semanticsen_US
dc.subjectconsequenceen_US
dc.subjectcounter-factualsen_US
dc.subjectcovering generalizationen_US
dc.subjectDavid Lewisen_US
dc.subjectJudea Pearlen_US
dc.subjectlaw-like generalizationen_US
dc.subjectmaterial consequenceen_US
dc.subjectstructural model semanticsen_US
dc.subjectPhilosophyen_US
dc.subjectPhilosophyen_US
dc.titleMaterial Consequence and Counter-Factualsen_US
dc.typeconferenceen_US

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
fulltext.pdf
Size:
127.26 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format