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

DOI10.1007/BF00485811zbMATH Open0758.03016MaRDI QIDQ1202503FDOQ1202503

Authors: S. Singh 

Publication date: 2 February 1993

Published in: Synthese (Search for Journal in Brave)

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

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)

Cites Work

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

Cited In (4)

• The case for psychologism in default and inheritance reasoning
• Title not available (Why is that?)
• Is default logic a reinvention of inductive-statistical reasoning?
• Title not available (Why is that?)

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)