We present a mathematical approach to defeasible reasoning based on arguments. This approach integrates the notion of specificity introduced by Poole and the theory of warrant presented by Pollock. The main contribution of this paper is a precise, well-defined system which exhibits correct behavior when applied to the benchmark examples in the literature. It aims for usability rather than novelty. We prove that an order relation can be introduced among equivalence classes of arguments under the equi-specificity relation. We also prove (...) a theorem that ensures the termination of the process of finding the justified facts. Two more lemmas define a reduced search space for checking specificity. In order to implement the theoretical ideas, the language is restricted to Horn clauses for the evidential context. The language used to represent defeasible rules has been restricted in a similar way. The authors intend this work to unify the various existing approaches to argument-based defeasible reasoning. (shrink)

Over the past decade or so, a new interdisciplinary field has emerged in the ground between, on the one hand, computer science – and artificial intelligence in particular – and, on the other, the area of philosophy concentrating on the language and structure of argument. There are now hundreds of researchers worldwide who would consider themselves a part of this nascent community. Various terms have been proposed for the area, including "Computational Dialectics," "Argumentation Technology," and "Argument-based Computing," but the term (...) that has stuck is simply Argument & Computation. It encompasses several specific strands of research, such as: . the use of theories of argument, and dialectic in particular, in the design and implementation of protocols for multi-agent action and communication; . the application of theories of argument and rhetoric in natural language processing and affective computing; . the use of argument-based structures for autonomous reasoning in artificial intelligence, and in particular, for defeasible reasoning; . computer-supported collaborative argumentation – the implementation of software tools for enabling online argument in domains such as education and e-government. These strands come together to form the core of a research field that covers parts of artificial intelligence (AI), philosophy, linguistics, and cognitive science, but, increasingly, is building an identity of its own. (shrink)

Argumentation represents a way of reasoning over a knowledge base containing possibly incomplete and/or inconsistent information, to obtain useful conclusions. As a reasoning mechanism, the way an argumentation reasoning engine reaches these conclusions resembles the cognitive process that humans follow to analyze their beliefs; thus, unlike other computationally reasoning systems, argumentation offers an intellectually friendly alternative to other defeasible reasoning systems. LogicProgrammingisacomputationalparadigmthathasproducedcompu- tationallyattractivesystemswithremarkablesuccessinmanyapplications. Merging ideas from both areas, Defeasible Logic Programming offers a computational reasoning system that uses an argumentation engine (...) to obtain answers from a knowledge base represented using a logic programming language extended with defeasible rules. This combination of ideas brings about a computationally effective system together with a human-like reasoning model facilitating its use in applications. (shrink)

In abstract argumentation, each argument is regarded as atomic. There is no internal structure to an argument. Also, there is no specification of what is an argument or an attack. They are assumed to be given. This abstract perspective provides many advantages for studying the nature of argumentation, but it does not cover all our needs for understanding argumentation or for building tools for supporting or undertaking argumentation. If we want a more detailed formalization of arguments than is available with (...) abstract argumentation, we can turn to structured argumentation, which is the topic of this special issue of Argument and Computation. In structured argumentation, we assume a formal language for representing knowledge and specifying how arguments and counterarguments can be constructed from that knowledge. An argument is then said to be structured in the sense that normally, the premises and claim of the argument are made explicit, and the relationship between the premises and claim is formally defined (for instance, using logical entailment). In this introduction, we provide a brief overview of the approaches covered in this special issue on structured argumentation. (shrink)

In this paper we propose an approach to multi-source belief revision where the trust or credibility assigned to informant agents can be revised. In our proposal, the credibility of each informant represented as a strict partial order among informant agents, will be maintained in a repository called credibility base. Upon arrival of new information concerning the credibility of its peers, an agent will be capable of revising this strict partial order, changing the trust assigned to its peers accordingly. Our goal (...) is to formalize a set of change operators over the credibility base: expansion, contraction, prioritized, and non-prioritized revision. These operators will provide the capability of dynamically modifying the credibility of informants considering the reliability of the information. This dynamics will reflect a new perception of trust assigned to the informant, or extend the set of informants by admitting the addition of new informant agents. (shrink)

Structured argumentation systems, and their implementation, represent an important research subject in the area of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning. Structured argumentation advances over abstract argumentation frameworks by providing the internal construction of the arguments that are usually defined by a set of (strict and defeasible) rules. By considering the structure of arguments, it becomes possible to analyze reasons for and against a conclusion, and the warrant status of such a claim in the context of a knowledge base represents the main (...) output of a dialectical process. Computing such statuses is a costly process, and any update to the knowledge base could potentially have a huge impact if done naively. In this work, we investigate the case of updates consisting of both additions and removals of pieces of knowledge in the Defeasible Logic Programming (DeLP) framework, first analyzing the complexity of the problem and then identifying conditions under which we can avoid unnecessary computations—central to this is the development of structures (e.g. graphs) to keep track of which results can potentially be affected by a given update. We introduce a technique for the incremental computation of the warrant statuses of conclusions in DeLP knowledge bases that evolve due to the application of (sets of) updates. We present the results of a thorough experimental evaluation showing that our incremental approach yields significantly faster running times in practice, as well as overall fewer recomputations, even in the case of sets of updates performed simultaneously. (shrink)

This work introduces the Attack-Support Argumentation Framework (ASAF), an approach to abstract argumentation that allows for the representation and combination of attack and support relations. This framework extends the argumentation Framework with Recursive Attacks (AFRA) in two ways. Firstly, it adds a support relation enabling to express support for arguments; this support can also be given to attacks, and to the support relation itself. Secondly, it extends AFRA’s attack relation by allowing attacks to the aforementioned support relation. Moreover, since the (...) support relation of the ASAF has a necessity interpretation, the ASAF also extends the Argumentation Framework with Necessities (AFN). Thus, the ASAF provides a unified framework for representing attack and support for arguments, as well as attack and support for the attack and support relations at any level. (shrink)

This paper proposes the use of an argumentation framework with recursive attacks to address a trust model in a collaborative open multi-agent system. Our approach is focused on scenarios where agents share information about the credibility (informational trust) they have assigned to their peers. We will represent informants’ credibility through credibility objects which will include not only trust information but also the informant source. This leads to a recursive setting where the reliability of certain credibility information depends on the credibility (...) of other pieces of information that should be subject to the same analysis. Credibility objects are maintained in a credibility base which can have information in conflict. In this scenario, we will formally show that our proposal will produce a partially ordered credibility relation; such relation contains the information that can be justified by an argumentation process. (shrink)

In this article we explore multiple change operators, i.e., operators in which the epistemic input is a set of sentences instead of a single sentence. We propose two types of change: prioritized change, in which the input set is fully accepted, and symmetric change, where both the epistemic state and the epistemic input are equally treated. In both kinds of operators we propose a set of postulates and we present different constructions: kernel changes and partial meet changes.

This work formalizes an informant-based structured argumentation approach in a multi-agent setting, where the knowledge base of an agent may include information provided by other agents, and each piece of knowledge comes attached with its informant. In that way, arguments are associated with the set of informants corresponding to the information they are built upon. Our approach proposes an informant-based notion of argument strength, where the strength of an argument is determined by the credibility of its informant agents. Moreover, we (...) consider that the strength of an argument is not absolute, but it is relative to the resolution of the conflicts the argument is involved in. In other words, the strength of an argument may vary from one context to another, as it will be determined by comparison to its attacking arguments (respectively, the arguments it attacks). Finally, we equip agents with the means to express reasons for or against the consideration of any piece of information provided by a given informant agent. Consequently, we allow agents to argue about the arguments’ strength through the construction of arguments that challenge (respectively, defeat) or are in favour of their informant agents. (shrink)

Most formalisms for representing common-sense knowledge allow incomplete and potentially inconsistent information. When strong negation is also allowed, contradictory conclusions can arise. A criterion for deciding between them is needed. The aim of this paper is to investigate an inherent and autonomous comparison criterion, based on specificity as defined in [POO 85, SIM 92]. In contrast to other approaches, we consider not only defeasible, but also strict knowledge. Our criterion is context-sensitive, i. e., preference among defeasible rules is determined dynamically (...) during the dialectical analysis.We show how specificity can be defined in terms of two different approaches: activation sets and derivation trees. This allows us to get a syntactic criterion that can be implemented in a computationally attractive way. The resulting definitions may be applied in general rulebased formalisms. We present theorems linking both characterizations. Finally we discuss other frameworks for defeasible reasoning in which preference handling is considered explicitly. (shrink)

We present different constructions for nonprioritized belief revision, that is, belief changes in which the input sentences are not always accepted. First, we present the concept of explanation in a deductive way. Second, we define multiple revision operators with respect to sets of sentences (representing explanations), giving representation theorems. Finally, we relate the formulated operators with argumentative systems and default reasoning frameworks.

Over the last decade, several extensions of Dung’s Abstract Argumentation Frameworks (AFs) have been introduced in the literature. Some of these extensions concern the nature of the attack relation, such as the consideration of recursive attacks, whereas others incorporate additional interactions, such as a support relation. Recently, the Attack–Support Argumentation Framework (ASAF) was proposed, which accounts for recursive attacks and supports, attacks to supports and supports to attacks, at any level, where the support relation is interpreted as necessity. Currently, to (...) determine the accepted elements of an ASAF (which may be arguments, attacks, and supports) it is required to translate such an ASAF into a Dung’s AF. In this work, we provide a formal characterization of acceptability semantics directly on the ASAF, without requiring such a translation. We prove that our characterization is sound since it satisfies different results from Dung’s argumentation theory; moreover, we formally show that the approach proposed here for addressing acceptability is equivalent to the preexisting one, in which the ASAF was translated into an AF. Also, we formalize the relationship between the ASAF and other frameworks on which it is inspired: the Argumentation Framework with Recursive Attacks (AFRA) and the Argumentation Framework with Necessities (AFN). (shrink)

Argumentation is a form of reasoning where a claim is accepted or rejected according to the analysis of the arguments for and against it; furthermore, it provides a reasoning mechanism able to handle contradictory, incomplete and uncertain information in real-world situations. We combine Bipolar Argumentation Frameworks (an extension of Dung’s work) with an Algebra of Argumentation Labels modeling two independent types of interaction between arguments, representing meta-information associated with arguments, and introducing an acceptability notion that will give more information for (...) arguments acceptability. (shrink)

In this paper we introduce a formalism for single-agent decision making that is based on Dynamic Argumentation Frameworks. The formalism can be used to justify a choice, which is based on the current situation the agent is involved. Taking advantage of the inference mechanism of the argumentation formalism, it is possible to consider preference relations, and conflicts among the available alternatives for that reasoning. With this formalization, given a particular set of evidence, the justified conclusions supported by warranted arguments will (...) be used by the agent’s decision rules to determine which alternatives will be selected. We also present an algorithm that implements a choice function based on our formalization. Finally, we complete our presentation by introducing formal results that relate the proposed framework with approaches of classical decision theory. (shrink)

The problem of knowledge evolution has received considerable attention over the years. Mainly, the study of the dynamics of knowledge has been addressed in the area of Belief Revision, a field emerging as the convergence of the efforts in Philosophy, Logic, and more recently Computer Science, where research efforts usually involve “flat” knowledge bases where there is no additional information about the formulas stored in it. Even when this may be a good fit for particular applications, in many real-world scenarios (...) different information items may be attached to formulas. For instance, when the reliability of the source of the piece of information is attached to it as a measure of some quality (e.g., strength) of the piece of information itself, or when some characteristic informs us on the desirability of the item (e.g., the potential benefit that could be obtained from it). If this type of information is available, we can use it to guide how the belief base is to be modified when new information arrives. In this work, we present a novel approach to the contraction of knowledge bases where formulas have values attached that measure some quality linked to those formulas, exploiting it to define their desirability, and uses such desirability to define which formulas need to be removed to solve conflicts. In this context, we introduce a set of properties for contraction operators by extending classic approaches. We also show how the local treatment of minimal conflicts can induce some counter-intuitive contractions, and we present a way to avoid them by considering optimal resolutions of conflicts using the additional information encoded. We show how the proposed formalization captures any contraction that is optimal under a set of features. Finally, we present a refinement based on the identification of related minimal conflicts that performs contraction in optimal ways without looking into the entire knowledge base. The approach is based on the use of the accrual of beliefs where several formulas collaboratively use their respective values to prevail in the resolution of conflicts. (shrink)

This work considers the formalisation of the merging process of stratified belief bases, where beliefs are stored in different layers or strata. Their strata are ranked, following a total order, employing the value the agent using the belief base assigns to these beliefs. The agent uses an argumentation mechanism to reason from the belief base and obtain the final inferences. We present two ways of merging stratified belief bases: the first is defined by merging two strata without belief preservation, and (...) the second by merging two strata with belief preservation. For these operators, as layers merge, it is possible that some information has to be deleted from the stratum to maintain consistency. The latter merge operator will be defined as performing their actions so that information removed from the stratum is preserved after the merging by moving it to a stratum containing information perceived as having a lower value and where those beliefs may trigger a new revision, possibly starting a cascading effect. (shrink)

El siglo XX fue una centuria de grandes descubrimientos científicos y desarrollos tecnológicos en todas las áreas, pero en particular en lo relativo a la conquista del espacio. Durante años, la bioética fue pensada en estrecha relación con la ética médica y el ámbito de problemas específicamente humanos, pero en los últimos tiempos su sentido se ha ido ampliando. El presente trabajo busca relacionar esta preocupación por una ciencia de la supervivencia con la existencia de la llamada basura espacial o (...) chatarra espacial que orbita la Tierra, y que en un tiempo no conocido afectará pequeñas o grandes áreas de nuestro planeta. La basura espacial se ha convertido en una preocupación cada vez mayor, especialmente en los últimos años, puesto que las colisiones a velocidades orbitales pueden producir aún más basura espacial en el proceso llamado síndrome de Kessler, o cascada de ablación, lo que perjudicaría el funcionamiento de los satélites, afectaría las misiones espaciales o pondría en riesgo la vida de los astronautas. También es probable que dicha basura se precipite sobre la Tierra, con efectos no claramente evaluados sobre la población humana. Aunque el problema suele aparecer tanto en textos científicos como en obras de ciencia-ficción, no ha sido considerado con la seriedad exigida para un riesgo real y no alejado de la vida cotidiana. (shrink)

Participatory research (PR) has been analyzed and documented from different points of view, with emphasis on the benefits generated for farmers. The effect of PR on organizational learning has, however, received little attention. This paper analyzes the interaction between a research and a development institution, the International Potato Center (CIP) and CARE in Peru, respectively, and makes the case that PR can contribute to creating a collaborative learning environment among organizations. The paper describes the evolution of the inter-institutional collaborative environment (...) between the two institutions for more than a decade, including an information-transfer period (1993–1996), an action-learning period (1997–2002), and a social-learning period (2003–2007). Several lessons learned from each period are described, as are changes in institutional contexts and stakeholders’ perceptions. The case shows that research and development-oriented organizations can interact fruitfully using PR as a mechanism to promote learning, flexibility in interactions, and innovation. Interactions foster the diffusion of information and the sharing of tacit knowledge within and between organizations, which in turn influences behavior. However, the paper also argues that long-term inter-organizational interactions are needed to facilitate learning, which can be used to influence the way organizations implement their interventions in a constantly changing environment. (shrink)

We present a longitudinal computational study on the connection between emotional and amodal word representations from a developmental perspective. In this study, children's and adult word representations were generated using the latent semantic analysis (LSA) vector space model and Word Maturity methodology. Some children's word representations were used to set a mapping function between amodal and emotional word representations with a neural network model using ratings from 9‐year‐old children. The neural network was trained and validated in the child semantic space. (...) Then, the resulting neural network was tested with adult word representations using ratings from an adult data set. Samples of 1210 and 5315 words were used in the child and the adult semantic spaces, respectively. Results suggested that the emotional valence of words can be predicted from amodal vector representations even at the child stage, and accurate emotional propagation was found in the adult word vector representations. In this way, different propagative processes were observed in the adult semantic space. These findings highlight a potential mechanism for early verbal emotional anchoring. Moreover, different multiple linear regression and mixed‐effect models revealed moderation effects for the performance of the longitudinal computational model. First, words with early maturation and subsequent semantic definition promoted emotional propagation. Second, an interaction effect between age of acquisition and abstractness was found to explain model performance. The theoretical and methodological implications are discussed. (shrink)

In this study, we analyzed the relationship between the amodal (semantic) development of words and two popular emotional norms (emotional valence and arousal) in English and Spanish languages. To do so, we combined the strengths of semantics from vector space models (vector length, semantic diversity, and word maturity measures), and feature-based models of emotions. First, we generated a common vector space representing the meaning of words at different developmental stages (five and four developmental stages for English and Spanish, respectively) using (...) the Word Maturity methodology to align different vector spaces. Second, we analyzed the amodal development of words through mixed-effects models with crossed random effects for words and variables using a continuous time metric. Third, the emotional norms were included as covariates in the statistical models. We evaluated more than 23,000 words, whose emotional norms were available for more than 10,000 words, in each language separately. Results showed a curve of amodal development with an increasing linear effect and a small quadratic deceleration. A relevant influence on the amodal development of words was found only for emotional valence (not for arousal), suggesting that positive words have an earlier amodal development and a less pronounced semantic change across early lifespan. (shrink)

In this note, the problem of tracking random references and rejecting random perturbations in a quadrotor, both generated by an auxiliary system named exosystem, is solved by extending the deterministic tracking problem to the area of stochastic processes. Besides, it is considered that only a part of the state vector of the quadrotor is available through measurements. As a consequence, the state vector of the plant must be estimated in order to close the control loop. On this basis, a controller (...) to track random references and to reject random perturbations is developed by combining a Kalman filter to estimate the references and perturbations of an exosystem and an observer to estimate the states of a quadrotor. Besides, to obtain a more practical controller, the analysis is carried out in discrete time. Numerical simulations are used in a quadrotor to confirm the validity and effectiveness of the proposed control. (shrink)

In the present philosophical reflection my purpose consists of revising two big points based on the book Theory and Practice of Bioethics Principles, written by Ricardo Maliandi and Oscar Thüer. The first point is linked with the problem of foundation of ethics proposed by the authors. The second point is linked with the problem related with the model of ethical applicability proposed by the authors.

The goal of this study was to introduce a model explaining how managers' attitudes, subjective norms, attributions, and the individualism-collectivism cultural dimension affect the way managers' deal with employee bribery in organizations. Twenty-six internal and external attributions related to bribery were identified through a series of structured interviews with 65 subject matter experts. These attributions, together with the other variables in the model, were evaluated by 354 Ecuadorian managers. Hierarchical regression analyses indicated that attitudes and external attributions significantly predicted managers' (...) intentions to discipline employees who accepted a bribe. In addition, external attributions mediated the relationship between individualism-collectivism and intent to discipline corrupt employees. Implications for the management of bribery in Latin American organizations are discussed. (shrink)

KOINONIA/ASETT MINGA/MUTIRÃO DE REVISTAS DE TEOLOGIA LATINO-AMERICANAS Teología de la Liberación y movimiento ecuménico: breve reflexión desde una práctica (Liberation Theology and ecumenical movement: a brief reflection from praxis).

O artigo – desde uma perspectiva da educação como direito humano universal que reconhece a diversidade – realiza um recorrido panorâmico por uma série de dimensões da educação intercultural no ensino superior do Chile, especialmente universitária, discute criticamente a situação atual da interculturalização na universidade – entendida genericamente – e conclui com algumas perguntas que podem orientar pesquisas ou decisões que levem a que o ensino superior considere os direitos indígenas, permita a expressão de sua cultura, promova a interculturalidade, forme (...) os técnicos e profissionais que requerem o desenvolvimento da sociedade e das comunidades e enriqueça a docência e a ciência com outros paradigmas de conhecimento. Desse modo, que reconheça e valide a interculturalidade e os aportes das culturas indígenas a sua identidade, formação e produção de conhecimento. Trata das comunidades e dos estudantes indígenas em geral, mas aprofunda a situação desde o povo mapuche, embasando-se em projetos de pesquisa e desenvolvimento e em experiências em e desde a Região da Araucanía. A proposta se centra na ideia de que o direito à educação, desde a lei e inconstitucionalidade atual, se centra no sistema escolar formal de ensino básico e médio e não considera a educação superior ou a um sistema de educação continuado como direito universal, no qual poderia se especificar uma condição especial aos estudantes indígenas. Por isso, hoje se luta pela igualdade de oportunidades de inclusão entre indígenas e não indígenas. Palavras-chave: Ensino Superior. Interculturalidade. Cultura mapuche. (shrink)

This paper analyzes an unpublished theory about the origin of global injustices that consider developing countries ethically responsible ontological units. The empirical case studies concern the relationships between multinational companies from developed states and Latin American states. These cases are analyzed based on a qualitative methodology of applied political philosophy and correspond to twelve instances of injustice judged by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights between 1980 and 2014. The article concludes that the distortions in an emerging Ethics of the (...) interdependence of the States, as the acting in bad faith of the governments of developing countries, largely explains the origins of the unfair global distribution of wealth and the economic refugees that it produces. (shrink)

Este trabajo describe la vida y escritos de L. Polo hasta 1996. A los 25 años descubrió su método de pensamiento: el abandono del limite mental. Vivió en Madrid, Roma, Granada y Pamplona. Amante de la verdad y de la libertad personal. Entre sus obras más profundas se encuentran las que componen su Curso de teoría del conocimiento y su Antropología trascendental.

Any plausibly just market exchange must balance two conflicting moral considerations: non-worseness (Wertheimer, 1999) and euvoluntariness (true voluntariness; Munger, 2011). We propose an analytical theory of just market exchange that partly resolves this conflict.

We uncover fundamental dimensions of the process through which organizations embed the practice of fraternity through embarking on an organizational journey in the direction of the common good. Building on the latest encyclical of Pope Francis, _Fratelli Tutti_, about fraternal and social friendship, we offer insight into the understanding of what it means to become a fraternal organization and reflect on the key ethical and paradoxical challenges for organizations aiming at collectively contributing to the common good. We add to previous (...) work by characterizing this journey as a process involving unique ethical challenges that emerge from the paradoxes associated with this process and how this might change the nature of the relationships between organizations and others within the organizational landscape. (shrink)

The meaning that expressions take on particular occasions often depends on the context in ways which seem to transcend its direct effect on context-sensitive parameters. ‘Truth-conditional pragmatics’ is the project of trying to model such semantic flexibility within a compositional truth-conditional framework. Most proposals proceed by radically ‘freeing up’ the compositional operations of language. I argue, however, that the resulting theories are too unconstrained, and predict flexibility in cases where it is not observed. These accounts fall into this position because (...) they rarely, if ever, take advantage of the rich information made available by lexical items. I hold, instead, that lexical items encode both extension and non-extension determining information. Under certain conditions, the non-extension determining information of an expression e can enter into the compositional processes that determine the meaning of more complex expressions which contain e. This paper presents and motivates a set of type-driven compositional operations that can access non-extension determining information and introduce bits of it into the meaning of complex expressions. The resulting multidimensional semantics has the tools to deal with key cases of semantic flexibility in appropriately constrained ways, making it a promising framework to pursue the project of truth-conditional pragmatics. (shrink)

ABSTRACTDo truth tables—the ordinary sort that we use in teaching and explaining basic propositional logic—require an assumption of consistency for their construction? In this essay we show that truth tables can be built in a consistency-independent paraconsistent setting, without any appeal to classical logic. This is evidence for a more general claim—that when we write down the orthodox semantic clauses for a logic, whatever logic we presuppose in the background will be the logic that appears in the foreground. Rather than (...) any one logic being privileged, then, on this count partisans across the logical spectrum are in relatively similar dialectical positions. (shrink)

Through the study of the behaviour of the protagonists in the work of Franz Kafka, we will try to expose the control mechanisms used by the administrative authorities, providing at the same time with an antidote to uncritical submission. A thorough observation of the configuration of diegetic situations will allow to reverse the situations of forced compliance to proffer, in the voice of the so-called secondary figures, a critical understanding to enable the recovery of individual freedom.

Recent work in formal semantics suggests that the language system includes not only a structure building device, as standardly assumed, but also a natural deductive system which can determine when expressions have trivial truth‐conditions (e.g., are logically true/false) and mark them as unacceptable. This hypothesis, called the ‘logicality of language’, accounts for many acceptability patterns, including systematic restrictions on the distribution of quantifiers. To deal with apparent counter‐examples consisting of acceptable tautologies and contradictions, the logicality of language is often paired (...) with an additional assumption according to which logical forms are radically underspecified: i.e., the language system can see functional terms but is ‘blind’ to open class terms to the extent that different tokens of the same term are treated as if independent. This conception of logical form has profound implications: it suggests an extreme version of the modularity of language, and can only be paired with non‐classical—indeed quite exotic—kinds of deductive systems. The aim of this paper is to show that we can pair the logicality of language with a different and ultimately more traditional account of logical form. This framework accounts for the basic acceptability patterns which motivated the logicality of language, can explain why some tautologies and contradictions are acceptable, and makes better predictions in key cases. As a result, we can pursue versions of the logicality of language in frameworks compatible with the view that the language system is not radically modular vis‐á‐vis its open class terms and employs a deductive system that is basically classical. (shrink)