James H. Fetzer (1993) Van Brakel's Position Appears to be Incoherent
. Psycoloquy: 4(14) Frame Problem (4)
Versions: ASCII formatted
Psycoloquy 4(14): Van Brakel's Position Appears to be Incoherent
VAN BRAKEL'S POSITION APPEARS TO BE INCOHERENT
Commentary on van Brakel on Ford & Hayes on the Frame-Problem
James H. Fetzer
Department of Philosophy
University of Minnesota
Duluth, MN 55812
jfetzer@ub.d.umn.edu
Abstract
Van Brakel's position appears to be incoherent. His
argument is logically inconsistent; second, in denying my position,
he denies his own; and, third, what he maintains is impossible is
actually possible. Van Brakel's stance is thus invalid on logical,
semantical and empirical grounds.
Keywords
Frame-problem, artificial intelligence, temporal logics,
independent persistence, attention, Hume, dynamic frames,
qualification problem.
References
- Ford, K.M. and P.J. Hayes (1991) Reasoning Agents in a Dynamic World: The Frame Problem. Greenwich: JAI Press.
- Hayes, P.J. (1992) Summary of "Reasoning Agents in a Dynamic World: The Frame Problem" (Ford & Hayes 1991, Eds.) PSYCOLOQUY 3(59) frame-problem.1
- van Brakel, J. (1992) The Complete Description of the Frame Problem. PSYCOLOQUY 3(60) frame-problem.2