Abstract
The first part of this paper presents asympathetic and critical examination of the approachof Shahid Rahman and Walter Carnielli, as presented intheir paper “The Dialogical Approach toParaconsistency”. In the second part, possibleextensions are presented and evaluated: (a) top-downanalysis of a dialogue situation versus bottom-up, (b)the specific role of ambiguities and how to deal withthem, and (c) the problem of common knowledge andbackground knowledge in dialogues. In the third part,I claim that dialogue logic is the best-suitedinstrument to analyse paradoxes of the Sorites type.All these considerations lead to philosophicallyrelevant observations concerning principles of charityon the one hand, and compactness on the other.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
REFERENCES
Barth, E. M. and R. T. P. Wiche: 1986, Problems, Functions and Semantic Roles, Walter de Gruyter, Berlin.
Barwise, J. and J. Etchemendy: 1987, The Liar. An Essay in Truth and Circularity, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Batens, D.: 1995, ‘Blocks, the Clue to Dynamic Aspects of Logic’, Logique et Analyse 150-152, 285-328.
Batens, D.: 1996, ‘Functioning and Teachings of Adaptive Logics’, in J. van Benthem, F. H. van Eemeren, R. Grootendorst and F. Veltman (eds), Logic and Argumentation, North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp. 241-54.
Da Costa, N., O. Bueno and S. French: 1998, ‘Is There a Zande Logic?’, History and Philosophy of Logic 19, 41-54.
Fagin, R., J. Y. Moses and M. Y. Vardi: 1995, Reasoning about Knowledge, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Heysse, T.: 1997, ‘Why Logic Doesn't Matter in the Philosophical Study of Argumentation’, Argumentation 11, 211-224.
Hintikka, J. and E. Saarinen: 1979, ‘Information-Seeking Dialogues: Some of Their Logical Properties’, Studia Logica 4, 355-363.
Johnson, R. H.: 1999, ‘The Relation between Formal and Informal Logic’, Argumentation 13, 265-274.
Keefe, R. and P. Smith (eds): 1997, Vagueness: A Reader, MIT, London.
Priest, G.: 1987, In Contradiction. A Study of the Transconsistent, Martinus Nijhoff, Dordrecht.
Rahman, S.: 1999, ‘On Frege's Nightmare. A Combination of Intuitionistic, Free and Paraconsistent Logics’, in H. Wansing (ed.), Essays on Non-Classical Logic, King's College University Press, London (to appear).
Rahman, S. and W. Carnielli: 1998, The Dialogical Approach to Paraconsistency, FR 5.1 Philosophie, Universität des Saarlandes, Memo No. 8. Also to appear in D. Krause (ed.): Essays on Paraconsistent Logic, Kluwer, Dordrecht.
Rahman, S. and J. A. Roetti: 1999, ‘Dual Intuitionistic Paraconsistency without Ontological Commitments’, Presented at the International Congress: Analytic Philosophy at the Turn of the Millennium in Santiago de Compostela (Spanien), 1-4 December 1999.
Rahman, S. and H. Rückert: 1998, Dialogische Logik und Relevanz, FR 5.1 Philosophie, Universität des Saarlandes, Memo No. 27.
Rahman, S. and H. Rückert: 1999, ‘Dialogische Modallogik (für T, B, S4 und S5)’, Logique et Analyse, to appear.
Vanackere, G.: 1997, ‘Ambiguity-Adaptive Logic’, Logique et Analyse 159, 261-280.
Van Bendegem, J. P.: 1985, ‘Dialogue Logic and Problem-Solving’, Philosophica 35, 113-134.
Van Bendegem, J. P.: 1999, ‘Inconsistencies in the History of Mathematics: The Case of Infinitesimals’, Proceedings of a Workshop on the Role of Inconsistencies in the History and Philosophy of the Sciences (to appear).
Van Benthem, J.: 1996, ‘Logic and Argumentation’, in J. Van Benthem, F. H. Van Eemeren, R. Grootendorst and F. Veltman (eds), Logic and Argumentation, North-Holland, Amsterdam, pp. 27-41.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Van Bendegem, J.P. Paraconsistency And Dialogue Logic Critical Examination And Further Explorations. Synthese 127, 35–55 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010310101727
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010310101727