# Non-monotonic Reasoning in Deductive Argumentation

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/1809.00858 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/1809.00858/

## Key facts

- Cited by 1 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- First posted on arXiv 4 Sep 2018.

## Built on by (most cited first, 1 of 1)

- [Understanding Enthymemes in Argument Maps: Bridging Argument Mining and Logic-based Argumentation](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2408.08648/) (2024)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Argumentation is a non-monotonic process. This reflects the fact that argumentation involves uncertain information, and so new information can cause a change in the conclusions drawn. However, the base logic does not need to be non-monotonic. Indeed, most proposals for structured argumentation use a monotonic base logic (e.g. some form of modus ponens with a rule-based language, or classical logic). Nonetheless, there are issues in capturing defeasible reasoning in argumentation including choice of base logic and modelling of defeasible knowledge. And there are insights and tools to be harnessed for research in non-monontonic logics. We consider some of these issues in this paper.