Abstract
Abstract
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Cf. Nebel [89], who has given a comprehensive overview of complexity results in belief revision.
References
Carruthers, P. (2006). The architecture of the mind: Massive modularity and the flexibility of thought. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cherniak, C. (1986). Minimal rationality. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Doyle, J. (1979). A truth maintenance system. Artificial Intelligence, 12, 231–271.
Fodor, J. (2001). The mind doesn’t work that way. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Johnson-Laird, P. (2006). How we reason. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Minsky, M. A. (1975). Framework for Representing Knowledge. In P. Winston (Ed.), The psychology of computer vision (pp. 211–277). McGraw-Hill. http://web.media.mit.edu/~minsky/papers/Frames/frames.html
Nebel, B. (1998). How hard is it to revise a belief base? In D. Dubois & H. Prade (Eds.), Handbook of defeasible reasoning and uncertainty management systems. Belief change (pp. 77–145). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Schneider, S. (2011). Language of thought: A new philosophical direction. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Stenning, K., & van Lambalgen, M. (2008). Human reasoning and cognitive science. Boston: MIT Press.
van Benthem, J. (2008). Logic and reasoning: Do the facts matter? Studia Logica, 88, 67–84.
Woods, J. (2013). Errors of reasoning: Naturalizing the logic of inference. London: College Publications.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Andreas, H. (2020). Conclusions. In: Dynamic Tractable Reasoning. Synthese Library, vol 420. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-36233-1_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-36233-1_9
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-36232-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-36233-1
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)