Inconsistencies and the dynamics of science

Joke Meheus

doi:10.12775/LLP.2003.007

Authors

Joke Meheus Ghent University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.12775/LLP.2003.007

Abstract

It is generally agreed upon today that scientific reasoning, like everyday reasoning, proceeds in a dynamic way: inferences derived at some stage in the reasoning process may at a later stage be rejected. This dynamics may be extrinsic or intrinsic. I shall call it extrinsic when previously derived conclusions are rejected on non-logical grounds, and intrinsic when their rejection is based on a purely logical analysis.

Author Biography

Joke Meheus, Ghent University

Centre for Logic and Philosophy of Science

References

Baelden, T., Niet-monotoon redeneren in de economie. Logische en filosofische aspecten, Master’s thesis, Universiteit Gent (Belgium), 2001.

Batens, D., ‘Inconsistency-adaptive logics and the foundation of non-monotonic logics’, Logique et Analyse, 145:57–94, 1994. Appeared 1996.

Batens, D., ‘Inconsistency-adaptive logics’, in Or lowska [38], pp. 445–472.

Batens, D., ‘Linguistic and ontological measures for comparing the inconsistent parts of models’, Logique et Analyse, 165–166:5–33, 1999. Appeared 2002.

Batens, D., ‘A survey of inconsistency-adaptive logics’, in Batens et al. [13], pp. 49–73.

Batens, D., ‘Towards the unification of inconsistency handling mechanisms’, Logic and Logical Philosophy, 8:5–31, 2000. Appeared 2002.

Batens, D., ‘A dynamic characterization of the pure logic of relevant implication’, Journal of Philosophical Logic, 30:267–280, 2001.

Batens, D., ‘In defence of a programme for handling inconsistencies’, in Meheus [33].

Batens, D., ‘Extending the realm of logic. The adaptive-logic programme’, in P. Weingartner, (ed.), Alternative Logics. Do sciences need them?, Springer Verlag, in print.

Batens, D., ‘On a logic of induction’, in Festa et al. [24].

Batens, D., and J. Meheus, ‘The adaptive logic of compatibility’, Studia Logica, 66:327–348, 2000.

Batens, D., J. Meheus, D. Provijn, and L. Verhoeven, ‘Some adaptive logics for diagnosis’, Logic and Logical Philosophy, in this issue.

Batens, D., C. Mortensen, G. Priest, and J. P. Van Bendegem, (eds.), Frontiers of Paraconsistent Logic, Research Studies Press, Baldock, UK, 2000.

Batens, D., and T. Vermeir, ‘Direct dynamic proofs for the Rescher–Manor consequence relations: The flat case’, Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logics, 12:63–84, 2002.

Benferhat, S., D. Dubois, and H. Prade, ‘Some syntactic approaches to the handling of inconsistent knowledge bases: A comparative study. Part 1: The flat case’, Studia Logica, 58:17–45, 1997.

Benferhat, S., D. Dubois, and H. Prade, ‘Some syntactic approaches to the handling of inconsistent knowledge bases: A comparative study. Part 2: The prioritized case’, In Or lowska [38], pp. 473–511.

Brown, B., ‘How to be realistic about inconsistency in science’, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 21:281–294, 1990.

Carnot, S., R´eflexions sur la Puissance Motrice du feu et sur les Machines propres `a d´evelopper cette Puissance, Bachelier, Paris, 1824. Reprinted, 1990, Sceaux, ´Editions Jacques Gabay.

Clausius, R., Ueber die bewegende Kraft der Wärme und die Gesetze, welche sich daraus für die Wärmelehre selbst ableiten lassen, 1864. Revised edition, reprinted and translated in F. Folie, (ed.), Théorie mécanique de la chaleur par R. Clausius. Paris, Librairie scientifique, indutrielle et agricole, 1868, pp. 17–106.

da Costa, N. C. A., and S. French, ‘Inconsistency in science. A partial perspective’, in Meheus [33], pp. 105–118.

De Clercq, K., ‘Reconstructie van een aantal niet-monotone logica’s aan de hand van een inconsistentie-adaptieve logica’, Master’s thesis, Universiteit Gent, 1997. Unpublished M.A. dissertation.

De Clercq, K., ‘Two new strategies for inconsistency-adaptive logics’, Logic and Logical Philosophy, 8:65–80, 2000. Appeared 2002.

D’Hanis, I., ‘A logical approach to the analysis of metaphors’, in Magnani et al. [29], pp. 21–37.

Festa, R., A. Aliseda, and J. Peijnenburg, (eds.), Logics of Scientific Cognition. Essays in Debate with Theo Kuipers, Poznan Studies in the Philosophy of the Sciences and the Humanities, Rodopi, Amsterdam. To appear.

Holmes, F. L., Lavoisier and the Chemistry of Life. An Exploration of Scientific Creativity, The University of Wisconsin Press, 1985.

Kuhn, T., The Essential Tension, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1977.

Langevin, P., and M. de Broglie, (eds.), La Th´eorie du Rayonnement et les Quanta, Gauthier-Villars, Paris, 1912.

Lukaszewicz, W., Non-Monotonic Reasoning. Formalization of Commonsense Reasoning, Ellis Horwood, New York, 1990.

Magnani, L., N. J. Nersessian, and C. Pizzi, (eds.), Logical and Computational Aspects of Model-Based Reasoning, Kluwer, Dordrecht, 2002.

Meheus, J., ‘Adaptive logic in scientific discovery: the case of Clausius’, Logique et Analyse, 143–144:359–389, 1993. Appeared 1996.

Meheus, J., ‘An extremely rich paraconsistent logic and the adaptive logic based on it’, in Batens et al. [13], pp. 189–201.

Meheus, J., ‘Inconsistencies in scientific discovery. Clausius’s remarkable derivation of Carnot’s theorem’, in H. Krach, G. Vanpaemel, and P. Marage, (eds.), History of Modern Physics, pp. 143–154, Brepols, Turnhout, 2002.

Meheus, J., (ed.), Inconsistency in Science, Kluwer, Dordrecht, 2002.

Meheus, J., ‘Empirical progress and ampliative adaptive logics’, in Festa et al. [24].

Meheus, J., L. Verhoeven, M. Van Dyck, and D. Provijn, ‘Ampliative adaptive logics and the foundation of logic-based approaches to abduction’, in Magnani et al. [29], pp. 39–71.

Nersessian, N. ‘Inconsistency, generic modeling, and conceptual change in science’, in Meheus [33], pp. 197–211.

Nickles, T., ‘Can scientific constraints be violated rationally’, in T. Nickles, (ed.), Scientific Discovery, Logic, and Rationality, Reidel, Dordrecht, 1980.

Orłowska, E., (ed.), Logic at Work. Essays Dedicated to the Memory of Helena Rasiowa, Physica Verlag (Springer), Heidelberg, New York, 1999.

Smith, J., ‘Inconsistency and scientific reasoning’, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 19:429–445, 1988.

Verhoeven, L., ‘Proof theories for some prioritized consequence relations’. To appear.