Definable Conditionals

Raidl, Éric

doi:10.1007/s11245-020-09704-3

Cited by 14 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Similarly, Rott (2019) has developed a logic for an expanded notion of the Ramsey test to ensure that the antecedent is relevant for the consequent, which he suggests could either be part of the truth or acceptability conditions of indicative conditionals. See further Raidl (2020) for an overview of several such formal systems.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Conditionals and the hierarchy of causal queries.

Skovgaard-Olsen¹,

Stephan²,

Waldmann³

2021

Journal of Experimental Psychology: General

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent studies indicate that indicative conditionals like "If people wear masks, the spread of Covid-19 will be diminished" require a probabilistic dependency between their antecedents and consequents to be acceptable (Skovgaard-Olsen et al., 2016). But it is easy to make the slip from this claim to the thesis that indicative conditionals are acceptable only if this probabilistic dependency results from a causal relation between antecedent and consequent.According to Pearl ( 2009), understanding a causal relation involves multiple, hierarchically organized conceptual dimensions: prediction, intervention, and counterfactual dependence. In a series of experiments, we test the hypothesis that these conceptual dimensions are differentially encoded in indicative and counterfactual conditionals. If this hypothesis holds, then there are limits as to how much of a causal relation is captured by indicative conditionals alone. Our results show that the acceptance of indicative and counterfactual conditionals can become dissociated. Furthermore, it is found that the acceptance of both is needed for accepting a causal relation between two co-occurring events. The implications that these findings have for the hypothesis above, and for recent debates at the intersection of the psychology of reasoning and causal judgment, are critically discussed. Our findings are consistent with viewing indicative conditionals as answering predictive queries requiring evidential relevance (even in the absence of direct causal relations). Counterfactual conditionals in contrast target causal relevance, specifically. Finally, we discuss the implications our results have for the yet unsolved question of how reasoners succeed in constructing causal models from verbal descriptions.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Conditionals and the hierarchy of causal queries.

Skovgaard-Olsen¹,

Stephan²,

Waldmann³

2021

Journal of Experimental Psychology: General

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Mod is a backtranslation of Mod. 9 The axioms presented so far express properties that → shares with >. The remaining two axioms CT and CSS, instead, express principles that do not hold in VC.…”

Section: The System CCmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Axiomatic System for Concessive Conditionals

2023

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

According to the analysis of concessive conditionals suggested by Crupi and Iacona, a concessive conditional $$p{{\,\mathrm{\hookrightarrow }\,}}q$$ p ↪ q is adequately formalized as a conjunction of conditionals. This paper presents a sound and complete axiomatic system for concessive conditionals so understood. The soundness and completeness proofs that will be provided rely on a method that has been employed by Raidl, Iacona, and Crupi to prove the soundness and completeness of an analogous system for evidential conditionals.

show abstract

“…While RBT and RAT hold both for and for >, RAST characterizes as distinct from >. 10 We will end with two principles which hold in EC and are weaker than RW and RM respectively.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Overall, putative counterexamples to Contraposition seem to be more controversial than the well known counterexamples to Monotonicity or Transitivity. Crupi and Iacona [2] provides a more detailed discussion of C. 9 Raidl [10] calls C and D "proper axioms," and explains their role in more general terms. Three further principles, which have been widely discussed in the literature on connexive logics, are Restricted Abelard' Thesis, Restricted Aristotle's Thesis, and Restricted Aristotle's Second Thesis.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Logic of the Evidential Conditional

Raidl¹,

Iacona²,

Crupi³

2021

The Review of Symbolic Logic

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In some recent works, Crupi and Iacona proposed an analysis of ‘if’ based on Chrysippus’ idea that a conditional holds whenever the negation of its consequent is incompatible with its antecedent. This paper presents a sound and complete system of conditional logic that accommodates their analysis. The soundness and completeness proofs that will be provided rely on a general method elaborated by Raidl, which applies to a wide range of systems of conditional logic.

show abstract

Definable Conditionals

Cited by 14 publications

References 18 publications

Conditionals and the hierarchy of causal queries.

Conditionals and the hierarchy of causal queries.

An Axiomatic System for Concessive Conditionals

The Logic of the Evidential Conditional

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About