Randomized Arguments are Transferable

Randomized Arguments are Transferable

Easwaran has given a definition of transferability and argued that, under this definition, randomized arguments are not transferable. I show that certain aspects of his definition are not suitable for addressing the underlying question of whether or not there is an epistemic distinction between randomized and deductive arguments. Furthermore, I demonstrate that for any suitable definition, rand...

Real Arguments Are Approximate Arguments

There are a number of frameworks for modelling argumentation in logic. They incorporate a formal representation of individual arguments and techniques for comparing conflicting arguments. A common assumption for logic-based argumentation is that an argument is a pair 〈Φ, α〉 where Φ is minimal subset of the knowledgebase such that Φ is consistent and Φ entails the claim α. However, real argument...

Are there null arguments in Athabascan?

The existence of null arguments in Athabascan languages, and other polysynthetic languages, is a debated topic. We argue that, if the agreement on the verb is the argument, the so-called Pronominal Argument Hypothesis, languages such as Navajo do not have null arguments in the traditional sense. We then outline the diachrony of Athabascan object marking on the verb (by looking at the various co...

Are Some Modus Ponens Arguments Deductively Invalid?

This article concerns the structure of defeasible arguments like: 'if Bob has red spots, Bob has the measles; Bob has red spots; therefore Bob has the measles.' The issue is whether such arguments have the form of modus ponens or not. Either way there is a problem. If they don't have the form of modus ponens, the common opinion to the contrary taught in leading logic textbooks is wrong. But if ...

Arguments against helmet legislation are flawed.