Abstract
This chapter is devoted to a logical analysis of reasoning with inconsistent information. For legal philosophy and AI-and-law this subject very relevant since, as noted in Chapter 3, the information with which a lawyer is confronted is often contradictory. However, the relevance of this chapter is not restricted to the legal domain; in other domains of common-sense reasoning people are also often confronted with conflicting sources of information. The problem faced by a logical analysis is that according to classical logic inconsistent premises are of no use at all, since classically from a contradiction everything can be derived. Therefore, standard logic is, if not inappropriate, at least insufficient to model nontrivial reasoning with inconsistent information.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1997 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Prakken, H. (1997). Reasoning with Inconsistent Information. In: Logical Tools for Modelling Legal Argument. Law and Philosophy Library, vol 32. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-8975-8_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-8975-8_7
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-90-481-4928-5
Online ISBN: 978-94-015-8975-8
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive