On Floating Conclusions

Daniela Schuster, Jan Broersen, Henry Prakken

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference contributionAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

When there are two lines of argument that contradict each other but still end up with
the same conclusion, this conclusion is called a floating conclusion. It is an open topic
in skeptical defeasible reasoning if floating conclusions ought to be accepted. Interestingly, the answer seems to be changing for different examples. In this paper, we
propose a solution for explaining the different treatments of the floating conclusion in
the various examples from the literature. We collect the examples from the literature,
extend them with additional examples and test various hypotheses for explaining the
difference by means of the examples. We will argue for a framework that accepts a
floating conclusion by default but allows for reasons to deviate from the default in
order to reject it. These reasons nicely explain the different underlying patterns of
our intuitions.
Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationProceedings of th e16th International Conference on Deontic Logics and Normative Systems
EditorsJuliano Maranhão, Clayton Peterson, Christian Strasser, Leendert van der Torre
PublisherCollege Publications
Pages199-215
ISBN (Electronic)978-1-84890-438-5
Publication statusPublished - 2023

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'On Floating Conclusions'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this