Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

CRMinf: the Argumentation Model

Published byHortense Wiggins Modified over 6 years ago

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "CRMinf: the Argumentation Model"— Presentation transcript:

1 CRMinf: the Argumentation Model
©CIDOC 2009 CRMinf: the Argumentation Model Stephen Stead Paveprime Ltd and Southampton University Oxford, UK, February 2015

2 Agenda How do we accumulate knowledge What do we accumulate An example
©CIDOC 2009 Agenda How do we accumulate knowledge What do we accumulate An example Unique feature of CRMinf Conclusion

3 Knowledge Accumulation
©CIDOC 2009 Knowledge Accumulation Observation What? How? When? Adoption From whom? Inference/Deduction Based on what? How?

4 Somebodies belief in something
©CIDOC 2009 Produces Beliefs Who When About What Set of propositions What True/False/Unknown I2 Belief Somebodies belief in something J5 holds to be J4 that I4 Proposition Set The Something I6 Belief Value True

5 An example (British Museum)
©CIDOC 2009 An example (British Museum) E39 Actor Person SdS P14 carried out by I5 Inference Making Evolution Decision J2 concluded that I2 Belief SdS Belief in Evolution A of Misc 4 J1 used as premise J4 that J5 holds to be J3 applies I2 Belief BM Belief in Spatial Relations of Misc 4 I4 Proposition Set Evolution A I6 Belief Value True I3 Inference Logic Catalogue Text Rules J2 concluded that J4 that J5 holds to be J2 concluded that I2 Belief SdS Belief in Evolution B of Misc 4 I4 Proposition Set S1 I6 Belief Value True J4 that J5 holds to be I2 Belief SdS Belief in Evolution C of Misc 4 I4 Proposition Set Evolution B I6 Belief Value False J4 that J5 holds to be I4 Proposition Set Evolution C I6 Belief Value False

6 Unique feature of CRMinf
©CIDOC 2009 Unique feature of CRMinf FALSE!

7 ©CIDOC 2009 Conclusion CRMinf documents:- Inference Chains Dead Ends

Download ppt "CRMinf: the Argumentation Model"

Similar presentations

-- in other words, logic is

-- in other words, logic is
Four Rules of Aristotelian Logic 1. Rule of Identity: A is A 2. Rule of Non-Contradiction: A is not (-A) 3. Rule of Excluded Middle: Either A or (-A)

Four Rules of Aristotelian Logic 1. Rule of Identity: A is A 2. Rule of Non-Contradiction: A is not (-A) 3. Rule of Excluded Middle: Either A or (-A)
Making Inferences Drawing conclusions from two premises: When it rains, the grass gets wet. The grass is wet. Can we assume that it rained? Can we jump.

Making Inferences Drawing conclusions from two premises: When it rains, the grass gets wet. The grass is wet. Can we assume that it rained? Can we jump.
Gettier and the analysis of knowledge Michael Lacewing

Gettier and the analysis of knowledge Michael Lacewing
Rules of Inferences Section 1.5. Definitions Argument: is a sequence of propositions (premises) that end with a proposition called conclusion. Valid Argument:

Rules of Inferences Section 1.5. Definitions Argument: is a sequence of propositions (premises) that end with a proposition called conclusion. Valid Argument:
Hume’s Problem of Induction. Most of our beliefs about the world have been formed from inductive inference. (e.g., all of science, folk physics/psych)

Hume’s Problem of Induction. Most of our beliefs about the world have been formed from inductive inference. (e.g., all of science, folk physics/psych)
Husserl I. The Realm of Ideas Philosophy 157 ©2002, G. J. Mattey.

Husserl I. The Realm of Ideas Philosophy 157 ©2002, G. J. Mattey.
BUS 290: Critical Thinking for Managers

BUS 290: Critical Thinking for Managers
Chapter 1 The Logic of Compound Statements. Section 1.3 Valid & Invalid Arguments.

Chapter 1 The Logic of Compound Statements. Section 1.3 Valid & Invalid Arguments.
Logic 3 Tautological Implications and Tautological Equivalences

Logic 3 Tautological Implications and Tautological Equivalences
Essential Deduction Techniques of Constructing Formal Expressions and Evaluating Attempts to Create Valid Arguments.

Essential Deduction Techniques of Constructing Formal Expressions and Evaluating Attempts to Create Valid Arguments.
THE PROCESS OF SCIENCE. Assumptions  Nature is real, understandable, knowable through observation  Nature is orderly and uniform  Measurements yield.

THE PROCESS OF SCIENCE. Assumptions  Nature is real, understandable, knowable through observation  Nature is orderly and uniform  Measurements yield.
Essential Deduction Techniques of Constructing Formal Expressions Evaluating Attempts to Create Valid Arguments.

Essential Deduction Techniques of Constructing Formal Expressions Evaluating Attempts to Create Valid Arguments.
BASIC CONCEPTS OF ARGUMENTS

BASIC CONCEPTS OF ARGUMENTS
Inductive and Deductive Reasoning Geometry 1.0 – Students demonstrate understanding by identifying and giving examples of inductive and deductive reasoning.

Inductive and Deductive Reasoning Geometry 1.0 – Students demonstrate understanding by identifying and giving examples of inductive and deductive reasoning.
1.5 Rules of Inference.

1.5 Rules of Inference.
0 Validity & Invalidity (Exercises) December 23, 2005.

0 Validity & Invalidity (Exercises) December 23, 2005.
The Critical Nouns and Their Definitions Critical Vocabulary of the Common Core.

The Critical Nouns and Their Definitions Critical Vocabulary of the Common Core.
1 Exploring time and space in the annotation of museum catalogues: The Sloane virtual exhibition experience Stephen Stead Vienna November 2014 University.

1 Exploring time and space in the annotation of museum catalogues: The Sloane virtual exhibition experience Stephen Stead Vienna November 2014 University.
Question of the Day!  We shared a lot of examples of illogical arguments!  But how do you make a LOGICAL argument? What does your argument need? What.

Question of the Day!  We shared a lot of examples of illogical arguments!  But how do you make a LOGICAL argument? What does your argument need? What.

Similar presentations

Ads by Google