Avoiding omnidoxasticity in logics of belief: a reply to MacPherson
Avoiding omnidoxasticity in logics of belief: a reply to MacPherson
In recent work MacPherson argues that the standard method of modeling belief logically, as a necessity operator in a modal logic, is doomed to fail. The problem with normal modal logics as logics of belief is that they treat believers as "ideal" in unrealistic ways (i.e., as omnidoxastic); however, similar problems re-emerge for candidate non-normal logics. The authors argue that logics used to model belief in artificial intelligence (AI) are also flawed in this way. But for AI systems, omnidoxasticity is impossible because of their finite nature, and this fact can be exploited to produce operational models of fallible belief. The relevance of this point to various philosophical views about belief is discussed.
475-95
O'Hara, Kieron
0a64a4b1-efb5-45d1-a4c2-77783f18f0c4
Reichgelt, Han
40c442e9-3d94-4444-abf8-2318f8034e74
Shadbolt, Nigel
5c5acdf4-ad42-49b6-81fe-e9db58c2caf7
1995
O'Hara, Kieron
0a64a4b1-efb5-45d1-a4c2-77783f18f0c4
Reichgelt, Han
40c442e9-3d94-4444-abf8-2318f8034e74
Shadbolt, Nigel
5c5acdf4-ad42-49b6-81fe-e9db58c2caf7
O'Hara, Kieron, Reichgelt, Han and Shadbolt, Nigel
(1995)
Avoiding omnidoxasticity in logics of belief: a reply to MacPherson.
Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic, 36 (3), .
Abstract
In recent work MacPherson argues that the standard method of modeling belief logically, as a necessity operator in a modal logic, is doomed to fail. The problem with normal modal logics as logics of belief is that they treat believers as "ideal" in unrealistic ways (i.e., as omnidoxastic); however, similar problems re-emerge for candidate non-normal logics. The authors argue that logics used to model belief in artificial intelligence (AI) are also flawed in this way. But for AI systems, omnidoxasticity is impossible because of their finite nature, and this fact can be exploited to produce operational models of fallible belief. The relevance of this point to various philosophical views about belief is discussed.
Text
ohara-omnidoxasticity.pdf
- Version of Record
More information
Published date: 1995
Additional Information:
Commentary on: B. MacPherson, 'Is it possible belief isn't necessary?' Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 34, 12-28
Organisations:
Web & Internet Science
Identifiers
Local EPrints ID: 252302
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/252302
PURE UUID: 4ad7dec6-f1d4-4326-84a0-a1b115f8d1ec
Catalogue record
Date deposited: 19 Jan 2000
Last modified: 15 Mar 2024 03:09
Export record
Contributors
Author:
Han Reichgelt
Author:
Nigel Shadbolt
Download statistics
Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.
View more statistics
