No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

In this thesis I provide an interpretation of Kant's theories of knowledge, nature, and being in order to argue that Kant's ontology is a productive ontology: it is a theory of being that includes a notion of production. I aim to show that Kant's epistemology and philosophy of nature are based on a theory of being as productivity. The thesis contributes to knowledge in that it considers in detail Kant's ontology and theory of being, topics which have generally been ignored or misunderstood. In arguing for Kant's productive ontology, I argue against Heidegger's interpretation of Kant, which states that Kant understands being as "produced permanent presence" or as divinely created materiality. Based on Kant's definition of being as positing, I argue, by contrast to Heidegger, that Kant understands being as the original productive relation between subject and object. This can also be expressed as the relation between formality and materiality, or between epistemic conditions and existence, that is productive of objects of experience. Being is not producedness but a relation of productivity, through which both subject and object are themselves productive. The subject is productive in its spontaneity, and nature, determined as dynamical interaction, is interpreted as productive. The subject, I will argue, does not understand nature as produced, but approaches it with a comportment towards its production as object of experience. Because of its own subjective productivity - spontaneity or "life" - the subject has a "productive comportment" towards nature. Ontology, I claim, concerns the realm of the productive relation of being, the realm of the relation between epistemic conditions and existence, and therefore the realm of possible experience. This marks Kant as divergent not only from what Heidegger calls "the ontology of the extant", but also from the concept-based ontology of the German rationalists. The general aims of the thesis are, first, to argue that being for Kant is the original relation between subject and object, and that ontology concerns this relation; second, to argue that ontology and being are understood in terms of production and productivity; and third, to argue that Heidegger is wrong to ascribe to Kant an understanding of being as "produced pennanent presence". I approach these aims by examining a number of Kant's texts in detail, focusing particularly on Kant's theses about existence and being in The One Possible Basis for a Demonstration of the Existence of God and the Critique of Pure Reason; on Kant's philosophy of nature and dynamical matter in the Transcendental Analytic and Metaphysical Foundations of Natural Science; on Kant's doctrine of experience and objectivity in the Transcendental Deductions; on ontological reflection and the productive comportment of "life" in the Critique of Judgment; and on Kant's final theory of matter, life and production in the Opus Postumum.

Η Αλλαγή Πεποιθήσεων είναι το πεδίο που ασχολείται, μελετά και τυποποιεί ένα πλήθος διαδικασιών της συλλογιστικής σκέψης. Οι θεμελιώδεις αρχές της βρίσκονται σε διάφορα φιλοσοφικά συστήματα της περιόδου της αρχαιότητας. Ωστόσο, η σύγχρονη προβληματική που αναπτύσσεται γύρω από το πεδίο αυτό και που καλείται να αντιμετωπίσει εντάσσεται στην ευρύτερη περιοχή της Αναπαράστασης της Γνώσης. Στα μέσα της δεκαετίας του 80 και ύστερα από την προσπάθεια μετάβασης σε πιο συστηματικές και μαθηματικές προσεγγίσεις, η Αλλαγή Πεποιθήσεων αποκτά την τελική της μορφή. Ο όρος Αλλαγή διαιρείται σε τρεις ευρείες υπό-ενότητες: την πρόσθεση, την αφαίρεση και την αναθεώρηση. Η πρόσθεση αναφέρεται στη συλλογή νέων πληροφοριών (επέκταση πεποιθήσεων), η αφαίρεση την απώλεια πληροφορίας, ενώ η αναθεώρηση ερμηνεύει τη μερική ή ολική αλλαγή στο σύνολο των πεποιθήσεών μας, εξαιτίας της εμφάνισης μίας νέας πεποίθησης. Κάθε διαδικασία Αλλαγής συνοδεύεται από ένα σύνολο ορθολογικών αξιωμάτων. Τα αξιώματα διατυπώθηκαν με κύριο σκοπό την ομαδοποίηση, ταξινόμηση και περιορισμό των συλλογιστικών μας ενεργειών. Εκτός από τους τύπους αλλαγών και τα σύνολα των αξιωμάτων που αναφέρθηκαν στο χώρο της Αλλαγής Πεποιθήσεων υπάρχουν και άλλες σημαντικές - συμπληρωματικές διαδικασίες. Μία από τις πιο γνωστές και επωφελείς είναι αυτή της Επαναλαμβανόμενης Αναθεώρησης. Ενώ η απλή αναθεώρηση ερμηνεύει καταστάσεις που προξενούνται από την εμφάνιση μίας και μόνο πληροφορίας, η επαναλαμβανόμενη αναθεώρηση διασαφηνίζει περιπτώσεις μάθησης μέσα από το φάσμα των διαδοχικών πεποιθήσεων. Η παρούσα διατριβή θα μπορούσε να διαιρεθεί σε τρεις μεγάλες κατηγορίες. Η πρώτη εξετάζει συστηματικά τις διάφορες μεθόδους και τεχνικές που αναφέρονται στη διεθνή βιβλιογραφία. Η δεύτερη περιλαμβάνει την κυριότερη ερευνητική μας συνεισφορά καθώς και οι προτάσεις μας πάνω σε ανοικτά προβλήματα της Αλλαγής των Πεποιθήσεων. Πιο συγκεκριμένα, στο αρχικό στάδιο της έρευνάς μας αποτυπώνεται η προσπάθεια σύνδεσης της αναθεώρησης με την επαναλαμβανόμενη αναθεώρηση πεποιθήσεων. Η σύνδεση αυτή επιτυγχάνεται με την εισαγωγή ενός νέου αξιώματος που ονομάζουμε αξίωμα επαναλαμβανόμενης ανάκτησης. Αποδεικνύεται ότι το αξίωμα της επαναλαμβανόμενης ανάκτησης μπορεί να χρησιμοποιηθεί σε πολλές περιπτώσεις κατά τις οποίες το δεύτερο αξίωμα (DP2) των Darwiche και Pearl χαρακτηρίζεται αρκετά ισχυρό. Αποδεικνύουμε επίσης την ορθότητα και πληρότητα του παραπάνω αξιώματος μέσα από το σύστημα σφαιρών του Adam Grove. Στη συνέχεια η έρευνά μας στρέφεται στην προσπάθεια σύνδεσης δύο πολύ σημαντικών περιοχών στην αλλαγή πεποιθήσεων: την Επαναλαμβανόμενη και τη Relevance-Sensitive αναθεώρηση πεποιθήσεων. Τα αποτελέσματα της απόδειξης αφενός αποκαλύπτουν την ύπαρξη μη-συνέπειας μεταξύ τους αξιώματος (P) για τη Relevanse-Sensitive αναθεώρηση πεποιθήσεων με κάθε ένα από τα (DP) αξιώματα της επαναλαμβανόμενης αναθεώρησης πεποιθήσεων, αφετέρου αξιώνουν μία αναγκαία και γενικότερη αποκατάσταση στα τυπικά μοντέλα της αλλαγής πεποιθήσεων. Ακόμη μπορεί να αποδοθεί στη δική μας έρευνα και κάτι διαφορετικό, σε σχέση με τις άλλες: ότι η διαδικασία της αφαίρεσης πεποιθήσεων βασίζεται σε Horn Clauses. Ωστόσο, η αμιγής ερευνητική μας προσπάθεια αναφέρεται την παροχή σημασιολογίας βασιζόμενη σε διατάξεις πιθανών κόσμων για τη διαδικασία του e-contraction που εισήγαγε ο James Delgrande. Η Τρίτη κατηγορία, τέλος, αποβλέπει στην παρουσίαση της κλασσικής θεωρίας της Αναθεώρησης Πεποιθήσεων μέσα από την εφαρμογή της στην επιστήμη των υπολογιστών και πιο συγκεκριμένα, μέσω του Σημασιολογικού Ιστού. / Belief Change is an area that studies and standardizes several reasoning processes. However, the problems it has to confront rest in the wider area of Knowledge Representation. In the mid-1980s and after a transition effort to more systematic and mathematical Approaches, the Belief Change gets into its final form. The term “change” splits in three wide subgroups: expansion, contraction and revision. The expansion regards the collection of new information (belief expansion), while contraction concerns the loss of information. Finally, the revision explains the partial or total change in our beliefs, deriving from the appearance of new information. Every Change process is coupled with several rational postulates. Those were mainly formulated to group, classify and constrain our reasoning. Apart from the change formulas and the postulates mentioned above, in the field of Belief Change there are other important – additional processes. One of the most known and useful is the Iterated Revision. While the simple Revision explains conditions that are induced from the emergence of one and only information, the Iterated Revision clarifies cases of learning through the spectrum of successive beliefs. The present dissertation is classified in three major categories. The first one concerns the systematic study of several methods and techniques found in the international bibliography. The second incorporates our main contribution in research and our propositions with regard in open problems of the Belief Change. More specifically, the initial stage of our research is an effort to connect the revision with the iterated belief revision. This connection is achieved with the introduction of a new postulate called “iterated recovery postulate”. It is also established that the iterated recovery postulate (IR) can be used in many cases where the second postulate DP2, by Darwiche and Pearl, is qualified as rather strong. Moreover, we prove hereby that the postulate is sound and complete through the Adam Grove’s System of Spheres. Our research continues to connect two very important areas in the Belief Change: the Iterated and the Relevance-Sensitive belief revision. The conclusions of this proof reveal the inconsistency between the (P) postulate, regarding the Relevance-Sensitive belief revision, with “each and every one” of the DP postulates of the iterated belief revision. Likewise, they urge for a broad and imperative recovery of the “belief change” typical models. Unlike others, our contribution in research has to do with the belief contraction process, based on Horn Clauses. Our pure research regards the provision of semantics based on possible worlds orderings for the process of e-contraction, introduced by James Delgrande. Finally, the third category tries to present the classical theory of Belief Revision through its application in the computer science and specifically through the Semantic Web.

The ability to change one's beliefs in a rational manner is one of many facets of the abilities of an intelligent agent. Central to any investigation of belief change is the notion of an epistemic state. This dissertation is mainly concerned with three issues involving epistemic states: 1. How should an epistemic state be represented? 2. How does an agent use an epistemic state to perform belief change? 3. How does an agent arrive at a particular epistemic state? With regard to the first question, note that there are many different methods for constructing belief change operations. We argue that semantic constructions involving ordered pairs, each consisting of a set of beliefs and an ordering on the set of "possible worlds" (or equivalently, on the set of basic independent bits of information) are, in an important sense, more fundamental. Our answer to the second question provides indirect support for the use of semantic structures. We show how well-known belief change operations and related structures can be modelled semantically. Furthermore, we introduce new forms of belief change related operations and structures which are all defined, and motivated, in terms of such semantic representational formalisms. These include a framework for unifying belief revision and nonmonotonic reasoning, new versions of entrenchment orderings on beliefs, novel approaches to withdrawal operations, and an expanded view of iterated belief change. The third question is. one which has not received much attention in the belief change literature. We propose to extract extra-logical information from the formal representation of an agent's set of beliefs, which can then be used in the construction of epistemic state. his proposal is just a first approximation, although it seems to have the potential for developing into a full-fledged theory. / Computing / D.Phil.(Computer Science)

The ability to change one's beliefs in a rational manner is one of many facets of the abilities of an intelligent agent. Central to any investigation of belief change is the notion of an epistemic state. This dissertation is mainly concerned with three issues involving epistemic states: 1. How should an epistemic state be represented? 2. How does an agent use an epistemic state to perform belief change? 3. How does an agent arrive at a particular epistemic state? With regard to the first question, note that there are many different methods for constructing belief change operations. We argue that semantic constructions involving ordered pairs, each consisting of a set of beliefs and an ordering on the set of "possible worlds" (or equivalently, on the set of basic independent bits of information) are, in an important sense, more fundamental. Our answer to the second question provides indirect support for the use of semantic structures. We show how well-known belief change operations and related structures can be modelled semantically. Furthermore, we introduce new forms of belief change related operations and structures which are all defined, and motivated, in terms of such semantic representational formalisms. These include a framework for unifying belief revision and nonmonotonic reasoning, new versions of entrenchment orderings on beliefs, novel approaches to withdrawal operations, and an expanded view of iterated belief change. The third question is. one which has not received much attention in the belief change literature. We propose to extract extra-logical information from the formal representation of an agent's set of beliefs, which can then be used in the construction of epistemic state. his proposal is just a first approximation, although it seems to have the potential for developing into a full-fledged theory. / Computing / D.Phil.(Computer Science)