Location

University of Windsor

Document Type

Paper

Start Date

6-6-2007 9:00 AM

End Date

9-6-2007 5:00 PM

Abstract

One might ask of two or more texts—what can be inferred from them, taken together? If the texts happen to contradict each other in some respect, then the unadorned answer of standard logic is everything. But it seems to be a given that we often successfully reason with inconsistent information from multiple sources. The purpose of this paper will be to attempt to develop an adequate approach to accounting for this given.

Creative Commons License

Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Response to Submission

John Woods, Commentary on Plumer & Olson

Reader's Reactions

John Woods, Commentary on Plumer & Olson (June 2007)

Included in

Philosophy Commons

Share

COinS
 
Jun 6th, 9:00 AM Jun 9th, 5:00 PM

Reasoning from Conflicting Sources

University of Windsor

One might ask of two or more texts—what can be inferred from them, taken together? If the texts happen to contradict each other in some respect, then the unadorned answer of standard logic is everything. But it seems to be a given that we often successfully reason with inconsistent information from multiple sources. The purpose of this paper will be to attempt to develop an adequate approach to accounting for this given.