Why Friedman's non-monotonic reasoning defies Hempel's covering law model

DOI10.1007/BF00485811MaRDI QIDQ1202503zbMATH OpenFDO

Authors S. Singh

Publication date 2 February 1993

Published in Synthese (Search for Journal in Brave)

zbMATH Keywords

business cyclephilosophy of scienceelectric circuitincomplete knowledgeHempel's covering law modellogic for causal explanationnon-monotonic epistemic logic

Mathematics Subject Classification ID

Other nonclassical logic (03B60) Philosophical and critical aspects of logic and foundations (03A05)

Recommendations

• scientific article; zbMATH DE number 589749
• scientific article; zbMATH DE number 2096998
• Scientific explanation: A critical survey
• Explanatory Nonmonotonic Reasoning
• Provided you're not trivial: adding defaults and paraconsistency to a formal model of explanation

Cites work

• A theory of diagnosis from first principles
• Chronological ignorance: Experiments in nonmonotonic temporal reasoning
• Epistemology without knowledge and without belief

Cited in

(4)

• scientific article; zbMATH DE number 589749 (Why is no real title available?)
• scientific article; zbMATH DE number 2096998 (Why is no real title available?)
• The case for psychologism in default and inheritance reasoning
• Is default logic a reinvention of inductive-statistical reasoning?

This page was built for publication: Why Friedman's non-monotonic reasoning defies Hempel's covering law model

Report a bug (only for logged in users!)Click here to report a bug for this page (MaRDI item Q1202503)