Non-cooperation in dialogue logic (Q5946355)

This paper describes dialogue games which include dealing with actions, both as the outcomes (conclusions) of practical reasoning, and as producing states of affairs which serve as evidence (premisses) for subsequent discussion, as in scientific experiments. This leads them to discuss threats (and promises) in dialogue, as locutions referring to actions envisaged but not yet performed, and to the general topic of non-cooperation. Under this heading, they distinguish such strategies as MindClosed, NoEngage, and Can'tSee. Their representation of Quarrel, in which one party repeatedly asserts and the other repeatedly rejects a single statement (p. 181) surely underestimates the creativity even of unusually inept participants, who could at least follow the apocryphal legal brief ``We have no case; abuse opposing attorney''.