@article {Meheus2014, title = {Deontic Reasoning on the Basis of Consistency Considerations}, year = {Submitted}, abstract = {

Deonticconflictsposeanimportantchallengetodeonticlogicians. The standard account —standard deontic logic, SDL— is not apt for addressing this challenge since it trivializes con flicts. Two main stratagems for gaining conflict-tolerance have been proposed: to weaken SDL in various ways, and to contextualize the reign of SDL to consistent subsets of the premise set. The latter began with the work of van Fraassen and has been further developed by Horty. In this paper we characterize this second approach in general terms. We also study three basic ways to contextualize SDL and supplement each of these with a dynamic proof theory in the framework of adaptive logics.

}, author = {Stra{\ss}er, Christian and Meheus, Joke and Aleks Knoks} } @incollection {5673678, title = {Data-driven induction in scientific discovery: a critical assessment based on Kepler{\textquoteright}s discoveries}, booktitle = {Logic, reasoning, and rationality}, year = {2014}, pages = {59{\textendash}76}, publisher = {Springer}, abstract = {

Motivated by the renewed interest in knowledge discovery from data (KDD) by the artificial intelligence community, this paper provides a critical assessment of the model of data-driven induction for scientific discovery. The most influential research program using this model is developed by the BACON team. Two of the main claims by this research program, the descriptive and constructive power of data-driven induction, are evaluated by means of two historical cases studies: the discovery of the sine law of refraction in optics and Kepler{\textquoteright}s third law of planetary motion. I will provide evidence that the data used by the BACON program{\textendash}-despite the claims being made{\textendash}-does not correspond with the historical data available to Kepler and his contemporaries. Secondly, it is shown that for the two cases the method by which the general law was arrived at did not involve data-driven induction. Finally, the value of the data-driven induction as a general model for scientific discovery is being questioned.

}, isbn = {9789401790109}, doi = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-9011-6\_4}, author = {Heeffer, Albrecht}, editor = {Weber, Erik and Wouters, Dietlinde and Meheus, Joke} } @incollection {J:Jerzy, title = {Discussive Adaptive Logics: {H}andling Internal and External Inconsistencies}, booktitle = {Essays in Logic and Ontology}, series = {Pozna{\'n} Studies in the Philosophy of the Sciences and the Humanities}, volume = {91}, year = {2006}, pages = {211-223}, publisher = {Rodopi}, address = {Amsterdam/New York}, author = {Meheus, Joke}, editor = {Malinowski, Jacek and Pietruszczak, Andrzej} } @article {JDa:ddp_cc, title = {Direct Dynamic Proofs for Classical Compatibility}, journal = {Logique et Analyse}, volume = {47}, number = {185{\textendash}188}, year = {2004}, pages = {305{\textendash}317}, abstract = {

In this paper, we present a goal-directed proof procedure for abductive reasoning. This procedure will be compared with Aliseda’s approach based on semantic tableaux. We begin with some comments on Aliseda’s algorithms for computing conjunctive abductions and show that they do not entirely live up to their aims. Next we give a concise account of goal-directed proofs and we show that abductive explanations are a natural spin-off of these proofs. Finally, we show that the goal-directed procedure solves the problems we encountered in Aliseda’s algorithms.

}, author = {Meheus, Joke and Provijn, Dagmar} } @incollection {J:pcsr, title = {Do We Need Paraconsistency in Commonsense Reasoning?}, booktitle = {Computer Modeling of Scientific Reasoning}, year = {2003}, pages = {135{\textendash}146}, publisher = {Universidad Nacional del Sur. EDIUNS}, address = {Bahia Blanca, Argentina}, author = {Meheus, Joke}, editor = {Delrieux, Claudio and Legris, Javier} } @article {J:d\&aal, title = {Deductive and Ampliative Adaptive Logics as Tools in the Study of Creativity}, journal = {Foundations of Science}, volume = {4}, year = {1999}, pages = {325{\textendash}336}, abstract = {

In this paper, I argue that logic has an important role to play in the methodological study of creativity. I also argue, however, that only special kinds of logic enable one to understand the reasoning involved in creative processes. I show that deductive and ampliative adaptive logics are appropriate tools in this respect.

}, author = {Meheus, Joke} } @incollection {J:nvfd, title = {De rationaliteit van persoonlijke inperkingen}, booktitle = {Aktueel Filosoferen}, year = {1993}, pages = {33{\textendash}38}, publisher = {Eburon}, author = {Meheus, Joke}, editor = {van Dooren, Wim and Hoff, Tineke} }