53 research outputs found
Strong and weak hypotheses
No full textIn this paper, we investigate the nature of empirical hypotheses used in scientific reasoning and the act of formulating hypotheses. This is achieved through a novel logical framework in which we provide specific semantics for two types of hypotheses: a strong and a weak sense of hypothesis, each characterized by different logical structures. This framework enables us to better characterize certain aspects of hypothetical reasoning in scientific practice, especially when we attempt to rationally deny the content of an empirical hypothesis
Physiotherapeutic Movements by Advanced Robotic Beds: Perspectives in Triggering Nanodrugs
No full textThere is a great interest in the use of nanodrugs to target specific pathologies that cannot be adequately treated by means of common drug. Nanomedicine can be combined with body/some members of body movements to trigger drug delivery. That is one of the most important objective of a new field of research and treatment methodology. This research traces out new approach of using a complete physiotherapeutic and robotic bed able to deploy different movements involving diverse parts of human body for this scope. Previous asset used by other authors do not perform the amount of movements allowed by the proposed robotic bed. It makes easier the process of oxygenation which is very important for nanodrug delivery
Assertion & Proof
No full textIn our introduction we make some remarks on the main topics of this issue: assertion and proof. We briefly describe how each of the papers in the present publication has contributed from either different or complementary perspectives to the logical reflection on assertion and proof, while also specifying the relation between them
Extending and Applying a Logic for Pragmatics
No full textThe aim of this paper is to provide an example for each extension strategy of the pragmatic logic.
Firstly, we analytically introduce the logic for pragmatics LP as a logic for assertions. Then, in section 3, we embrace the first strategy in an attempt to show that the speech act of denial can be reduced
to the act of assertion (we are assuming, indeed, the equivalence thesis).
However, we will see that this attempt fails: the act of denying A cannot be reduced to the act of asserting ¬ A. In section 4 and section 5, we propose two extensions of LP: the first one, which follows the first sub-strategy,
previously cited, permits the treatment of the hypotheses, the second one,
which is in harmony with the second sub-strategy, is such that the act of
proving is formalisable
Towards a polarized semantics for assertion and denial
No full textRecent logic and linguistic literature suggest that certain forms of denial cannot be reduced to a simple assertion of negation. In particular, the existence of mathematical and empirical conjectures offers a basis for refuting Frege's thesis of equivalence between denial and assertion of negation. Following this line of thought we develop a formal framework with two primitive illocutionary operators for assertion and denial, where denial is not a simple negation of assertion. We introduce a semantics for the operators mentioned above. Finally, we discuss the relations between asserted and denied contents
Some Remarks on Assertion and Proof
No full textIn our introduction we make some remarks on the main topics of this issue: assertion and proof. We briefly describe how each of the papers in the present publication has contributed from either different or complementary perspectives to the logical reflection on assertion and proof, while also specifying the relation between them
How to Say 'Yes' or 'No': Logical Approaches to Modes of Assertion and Denial
No full textHow to Say 'Yes' or 'No':
Logical Approaches to Modes of Assertion and Denial. Book of Abstracts
Pragmatic Logics for Hypotheses and Evidence
No full textThe present paper is devoted to present two pragmatic logics and their corresponding intended interpretations according to which an illocutionary act of (scientific) hypothesis-making is justified by a scintilla of evidence. The paper first introduces a general pragmatic frame for assertions, expanded to hypotheses, AH and a hypothetical pragmatic logic for evidence HLP. Both AH and HLP are extensions of the Logic for Pragmatics, LP. We compare AH and HLP. Then, we underline the expressive and inferential richness of both systems in dealing with hypothetical judgements, especially when based on different, sometimes conflicting, evidence
Assertions and Hypotheses: A Logical Framework for Their Opposition Relations
No full textFollowing the speech act theory, we take hypotheses and assertions as linguistic acts with different illocutionary forces. We
assume that a hypothesis is justified if there is at least a scintilla of evidence for the truth of its propositional content, while
an assertion is justified when there is conclusive evidence that its propositional content is true. Here we extend the logical
treatment for assertions given by Dalla Pozza and Garola (1995, Erkenntnis, 43, 81–109) by outlining a pragmatic logic for
assertions and hypotheses. On the basis of this extension we analyse the standard logical opposition relations for assertions
and hypotheses. We formulate a pragmatic square of oppositions for assertions and a hexagon of oppositions for hypotheses.
Finally, we give a mixed hexagon of oppositions to point out the opposition relations for assertions and hypothese
- …
