Skip to main content
Log in

Recent Developments in Computing and Philosophy

  • Report
  • Published:
Journal for General Philosophy of Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Allen, C., et al. (2008). The world is not flat: Expertise and InPhO. First Monday 13(8).

  • Audi, R. (1997). The place of testimony in the fabric of justification and knowledge. American Philosophical Quarterly, 34, 405–422.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baier, A. (1986). Trust and antitrust. Ethics and Information Technology, 96(2), 231–260.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barker-Plummer, D., et al. (2008). Openproof: A flexible framework for heterogeneous reasoning. In J. Howse, J. Lee & G. Stapleton (Eds.). Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on the Theory and Application of Diagrams. Diagrams 2008 LNAI 5223 (pp .347–349).

  • Barnes, T., et al. (2011). Using Markov decision processes for student problem-solving visualization and automatic hint generation. In C. Romero, S. Ventura, M. Pechenizkiy, & R. Baker (Eds.), Handbook on educational data mining (pp. 467–480). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.

  • Beavers, A. (2011). Noesis and the encyclopedic Internet vision. Synthese, 182(2), 315–333.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourget, D. (2010). Paperless philosophy as a philosophical method. The Journal of Social Epistemology, 24(4), 363–375.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bringsjord, S. (2008). Declarative/logic-based computational cognitive modeling. In R. Sun (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of computational psychology (pp. 127–169). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buckner, C., et al. (2011). From encyclopedia to ontology: Toward dynamic representation of the discipline of philosophy. Synthese, 182(2), 205–233.

    Google Scholar 

  • Church, A. (1940). A formulation of the simple theory of types. The Journal of Symbolic Logic, 5, 56–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Croy, M., et al. (2008). Towards an intelligent tutoring system for propositional proof construction. In A. Briggle, K. Waelbers, & P. Brey (Eds.), Computing and philosophy (pp. 145–155). Amsterdam: IOS Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ess, C. (forthcoming). Trust and new communication technologies: Vicious circles, virtuous circles, possible futures. Knowledge, Technology and Policy.

  • Fitelson, B., & Zalta, E. (2007). Steps toward a computational metaphysics. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 36(2), 227–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Floridi, L. (Ed.). (2010a). The Cambridge handbook of information and computer ethics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Floridi, L. (2010b). Information: A very short introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Floridi, L. (2011). The Philosophy of information. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Gambetta, D. (1998). Can we trust trust? In D. Gambetta (Ed.), Trust: Making and breaking cooperative relations (pp. 213–238). Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grim, P. (1993). Self-reference and chaos in fuzzy logic. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, 1, 237–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grim, P. (1995). The greater generosity of the spatialized prisoner’s dilemma. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 173, 353–359.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grim, P. (1996). Spatialization and greater generosity in the stochastic prisoner’s dilemma. BioSystems, 37, 3–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grim, P. (1997). Undecidability in the spatialized prisoner’s dilemma. Theory and Decision, 42, 53–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grim, P. (2008). Lessons from networks: Cooperation, communication, and epistemology. University of Pennsylvania, May: Formal Methods in Philosophy Workshop.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grim, P. (2009a). Network simulations and their philosophical implications: Models for semantics, pragmatics, and epistemology. Models and Simulations 3 Conference, University of Virginia, March 6–8.

  • Grim, P. (2009b). Philosophical implications of interaction and information networks. Evolution, Game Theory & the Social Contract Conference, University of California, Irvine, March 26–29.

  • Grim, P. (2010). Modeling the dynamics of belief networks. In North American Computing and Philosophy Conference, Carnegie Mellon University, July 24–26.

  • Grim, P., et al. (2010). Developing an agent-based model to assess racial differences in medical discrimination, social support, and trust. Wrap-Up Session for the 2009–2010 Computational Modeling Pilot Grants, University of Pittsburgh Graduate School of Public Health.

  • Grim, P., & Mar, G. (1991). Pattern and chaos: New images in the semantics of paradox. Noûs, 25, 659–694.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grim, P., et al. (1993). Self-reference and paradox in two and three dimensions. Computers and Graphics, 17, 609–612.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grim, P., et al. (1998). The philosophical computer: Exploratory essays in philosophical computer modeling. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, K. (1996). Trust as an affective attitude. Ethics and Information Technology, 107(1), 4–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luhmann, N. (1979). Trust and power. Chichester, UK: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Niepert, M., et al. (2007). A dynamic ontology for a dynamic reference work. In E. Rasmussen, R. Larson, E. Toms, & S. Sugimoto (Eds.). Proceedings of the 7th ACM/IEEE-CS Joint Conference on Digital Libraries (pp. 288–297). New York: ACM.

  • Nissenbaum, H. (2001). Securing trust online: Wisdom or oxymoron. Boston University Law Review, 81(3), 635–664.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oppenheimer, P., & Zalta, E. (1991). On the logic of the ontological argument. Philosophical Perspectives, 5, 509–529.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oppenheimer, P., & Zalta, E. (2011a). A computationally-discovered simplification of the ontological argument. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 89(2), 333–349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oppenheimer, P., & Zalta, E. (2011b). Relations versus functions at the foundations of logic: Type-theoretic considerations. Journal of Logic and Computation, 21, 351–374.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parkinson, G., (Ed., Trans.). (1966). Leibniz: Logical papers. Oxford: Clarendon.

  • Pelletier, F., & Zalta, E. (2000). How to say goodbye to the third man. Noûs, 34(2), 165–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Russell, B. (1908). Mathematical logic as based on the theory of types. American Journal of Mathematics, 30, 222–262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seig, W. (2007). AProS project: Strategic thinking & computational logic. Logic Journal of the IGPL, 15, 359–368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sharkey, N. (2007). Automated killers and the computing profession. IEEE Computer Magazine, 40(11), 122–123.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharkey, N. (2008a). The ethical frontiers of robotics. Science, 322, 1800–1801.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sharkey, N. (2008b). Grounds for discrimination: Autonomous robot weapons. RUSI Defence Systems, 11(2), 86–89.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharkey, N. (2009a). Death strikes from the sky: The calculus of proportionality. IEEE Science and Society, 28, 16–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharkey, N. (2009b). A matter of precision. Defence Management Journal, 47, 126–128.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharkey, N. (2009c). Weapons of indiscriminate lethality. FIfF Kommunikation, 1(09), 26–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharkey, N. (forthcoming). Killing made easy: from joystics to politics. In P. Lin, G. Bekey, & K. Abney (Eds.), Robot ethics: The ethical and social implications of robotics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

  • Sharkey, N., & Sharkey, A. (2010). Living with robots: Ethical tradeoffs in eldercare. In Y. Wilks (Ed.), Close engagements with artificial companions: Key social, psychological, ethical and design issues (pp. 245–256). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharkey, N., et al. (2010). The coming robot crimewave. IEEE Computer Magazine, 43(8), 114–115.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stamper, J., et al. (2010). Enhancing the automatic generation of hints with expert seeding. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 6095, 31–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stenning, K., & Lambalgen, M. (2008). Human reasoning and cognitive science. Cambridge: Bradford Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taddeo, M. (2009). Defining trust and e-trust: Old theories and new problems. International Journal of Technology and Human Interaction, 5(2), 23–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taddeo, M. (2010). Modelling trust in artificial agents: A first step toward the analysis of e-trust. Minds and Machines, 20(2), 243–257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turilli, M., et al. (2010). The case of on-line trust. Knoweldge Technology and Policy, 231(3–4), 333–345.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weckert, J. (2005). Trust in cyberspace. In R. Cavalier (Ed.), The impact of the Internet on our moral lives (pp. 95–120). Albany: State University of New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zalta, E. (1983). Abstract objects: An introduction to axiomatic metaphysics. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zalta, E. (1988). Intensional logic and the metaphysics of intentionality. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zalta, E. (1993). Twenty-five basic theorems in situation and world theory. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 22, 385–428.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zalta, E. (2000). A (Leibnizian) theory of concepts. Philosophiegeschichte und logische Analyse, 3, 137–183.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anthony F. Beavers.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Beavers, A.F. Recent Developments in Computing and Philosophy. J Gen Philos Sci 42, 385–397 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10838-011-9164-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10838-011-9164-y

Keywords

Navigation