Assessment | Biopsychology | Comparative | Cognitive | Developmental | Language | Individual differences | Personality | Philosophy | Social |
Methods | Statistics | Clinical | Educational | Industrial | Professional items | World psychology |

Philosophy Index: Aesthetics · Epistemology · Ethics · Logic · Metaphysics · Consciousness · Philosophy of Language · Philosophy of Mind · Philosophy of Science · Social and Political philosophy · Philosophies · Philosophers · List of lists

Defeasible reasoning is the study of forms of reasoning that, while convincing, are not as formal and rigorous as deductive reasoning. It has been discussed in philosophy and, more recently, in artificial intelligence.

Other alternatives to deductive reasoning include inductive reasoning and retroductive reasoning. These are not traditionally covered by most uses of the term "defeasible reasoning".

Origins in philosophy[edit | edit source]

Though Aristotle differentiated the forms of reasoning that are valid for logic and philosophy from the more general ones that are used in everyday life (see dialectics and rhetoric), subsequent philosophers mainly concentrated on deductive reasoning.

It wasn't until logical positivism started falling out of favour that philosophers like Roderick Chisholm and John L. Pollock renewed an interest in defeasible reasoning.

Artificial intelligence[edit | edit source]

Around the same time period, developments in artificial intelligence led pioneers like John McCarthy and Patrick J. Hayes to represent a form of defeasible reasoning as they encountered the frame problem and the qualification problem.

Several forms of defeasible reasoning were proposed:

See also[edit | edit source]

External links[edit | edit source]


This page uses Creative Commons Licensed content from Wikipedia (view authors).
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.