Static Knowledge vs. Dynamic Argumentation: A Dual Theory Based on Kripke Semantics
Abstract
This paper establishes a dual theory about knowledge and argumentation. Our idea is rooted at both epistemic logic and argumentation theory, and we aim to merge these two fields, not just in a superficial way but to thoroughly disclose the intrinsic relevance between knowledge and argumentation. Specifically, we define epistemic Kripke models and argument Kripke models as a dual pair, and then work out a two-way generation method between these two types of Kripke models. Such generation is rigorously justified by a duality theorem on modal formulae's invariance. We also provide realistic examples to demonstrate our generation, through which our framework's practical utility gets strongly advocated. We finally propose a philosophical thesis that knowledge is essentially dynamic, and we draw certain connection to Maxwell's demon as well as the well-known proverb "knowledge is power".
Cite
@article{arxiv.2209.13082,
title = {Static Knowledge vs. Dynamic Argumentation: A Dual Theory Based on Kripke Semantics},
author = {Xinyu Wang and Momoka Fujieda},
journal= {arXiv preprint arXiv:2209.13082},
year = {2022}
}