Logique et Analyse最新文献

Some Logical Notations for Pragmatic Assertions 实用断言的一些逻辑符号

IF 0.3 3区哲学

Logique et Analyse Pub Date : 2020-01-01 DOI: 10.2143/LEA.251.0.3288642

Pietarinen Ahti-Veikko, Carrara Massimiliano, Chiffi Daniele

引用次数: 0

On Linear Existential Graphs 关于线性存在图

IF 0.3 3区哲学

Logique et Analyse Pub Date : 2020-01-01 DOI: 10.2143/LEA.251.0.3288641

Bellucci Francesco, L. Xinwen, Pietarinen Ahti-Veikko

引用次数: 2

Regions of Force: Peirce, Frege, Carroll, and Bilateral Proof Trees 力量区域:皮尔斯，弗雷格，卡罗尔和双边证明树

IF 0.3 3区哲学

Logique et Analyse Pub Date : 2020-01-01 DOI: 10.2143/LEA.251.0.3288643

Dave Beisecker

引用次数: 0

What do we mean when we talk of object-language and metalanguage in the theory of natural languages? 当我们在自然语言理论中谈论对象语言和元语言时，我们指的是什么?

IF 0.3 3区哲学

Logique et Analyse Pub Date : 2019-12-01 DOI: 10.2143/LEA.248.0.3287321

P. D. Brabanter

引用次数: 0

Causation & technical problem solving : an analysis of causal knowledge underlying proposed solutions for technical problems 因果关系和技术问题解决:对技术问题的解决方案背后的因果知识进行分析

IF 0.3 3区哲学

Logique et Analyse Pub Date : 2019-01-01 DOI: 10.2143/LEA.247.0.3287265

E. Weber, Inge De Bal

引用次数: 0

A Graphical Deep Inference System for Intuitionistic Logic 直观逻辑的图形深度推理系统

IF 0.3 3区哲学

Logique et Analyse Pub Date : 2019-01-01 DOI: 10.2143/LEA.245.0.3285706

Minghui Ma, Pietarinen Ahti-Veikko

引用次数: 13

Pure term models for modal, intensional set theory 模态，内涵集合理论的纯项模型

IF 0.3 3区哲学

Logique et Analyse Pub Date : 2018-09-04 DOI: 10.2143/LEA.237.0.3285353

R. Hinnion

引用次数: 0

Beyond team-directed reasoning: participatory intentions contribute to a theory of collective agency 超越团队导向推理:参与性意图有助于集体代理理论

IF 0.3 3区哲学

Logique et Analyse Pub Date : 2018-09-01 DOI: 10.2143/LEA.243.0.3285130

H. Duijf

{"title":"Beyond team-directed reasoning: participatory intentions contribute to a theory of collective agency","authors":"H. Duijf","doi":"10.2143/LEA.243.0.3285130","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2143/LEA.243.0.3285130","url":null,"abstract":"Philosophical accounts of collective intentionality typically rely on members to form a personal intention of sorts, viewed as a mental state. This tendency is opposed by recent economic literature on team-directed reasoning (as studied by Bacharach, Gold, and Sugden), which focuses on the reasoning process leading up to the formation of the members’ intentions. Our formal analysis bridges these paradigms and criticizes the team- directed reasoning account on two counts: first, team-directed reasoning is supposed to transcend traditional game and decision theory by adopting a certain collectivistic reasoning method. However, we show that team-directed reasoning yields the same action recommendations as a certain I-mode we-intention type. Accordingly, an important part of we-mode reasoning can be reduced to I-mode reasoning with certain preferences. Second, contrary to the claims of team-directed-reasoning theorists, we refute that team-directed reasoning surpasses pro-group intentions in selecting cooperatively rational solutions. That is, in some scenarios team-directed reasoning fails to guarantee successful cooperation whereas pro-group intentions succeed in doing so. We therefore propose to revise team-directed reasoning and introduce a third we-intention type, called participatory intentions. We prove that participatory intentions guarantee that a best group action is performed whenever either team-directed reasoning or pro-group intentions do.","PeriodicalId":46471,"journal":{"name":"Logique et Analyse","volume":"73 1","pages":"269-298"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2018-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84248747","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 3

Some Preliminaries on Assertion and Denial 关于断言与否认的一些初步问题

IF 0.3 3区哲学

Logique et Analyse Pub Date : 2017-09-01 DOI: 10.2143/LEA.239.0.3237150

F. Buekens, Massimiliano Carrara, D. Chiffi, C. Florio

引用次数: 1

Saying 'Yes' and 'No' in Matters of Personal Taste 在个人品味问题上说“是”和“不是”

IF 0.3 3区哲学

Logique et Analyse Pub Date : 2017-09-01 DOI: 10.2143/LEA.239.0.3237151

F. Buekens

{"title":"Saying 'Yes' and 'No' in Matters of Personal Taste","authors":"F. Buekens","doi":"10.2143/LEA.239.0.3237151","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2143/LEA.239.0.3237151","url":null,"abstract":"This paper examines the communicative function of public pronouncements about what is tasty, agreeable or attractive, followed by an equally public endorsement or rejection. The typical and expected reaction to contributions like 'This is tasty' or 'The roller coaster is fun' in a conversational setting is not 'how come?' or 'How do you know that?', but a reply that reveals one's own attitude towards an object or state of affairs, thus revealing conflict or alignment over the issue at hand. Judgements of taste (their content and the speech acts performed) are explored in the context of a cooperative view of communication developed by Michael Tomasello, which classifies communicative actions in terms of what we want from others when we communicate to them. We also use game theory. The game-theoretical connotation for a public dispute over what to like or to prefer is a co-ordination game like Battle of the Sexes. Speech act theory traditionally allows that speakers can perform different speech acts simultaneously. Combining both views, we argue that the public pronouncements that give rise to seemingly faultless disagreement have informative, requestive and alignment-seeking dimensions, which make different propositional contents salient. In a dispute over whether something is tasty (fun,...) a speaker and her intended audience usually play two games the game of letting others know something (about oneself), and the alignment of attitudes game, i.e. the game of making moves in the direction of seeking alignment over what to prefer, or what would be preferable, in a given situation. Both games make different propositions salient. I conclude with a brief evaluation of current disputes over what's tasty (comical,...) between contextualists and assessment relativists in matters of personal taste.","PeriodicalId":46471,"journal":{"name":"Logique et Analyse","volume":"37 1","pages":"209-226"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2017-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80779050","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0