In abstract argumentation theory, preferred semantics has become one of the most popular approaches for determining the sets of arguments that can collectively be accepted. However, the description of preferred semantics, as it was originally stated by Dung, has a mainly technical and mathematical nature, making it difficult for lay persons to understand what the concept of preferred semantics is essentially about. In the current paper, we aim to bridge the gap between mathematics and philosophy by providing a reformulation of (credulous) preferred semantics in terms of Socratic discussion. In order to do so, we first provide a (semi-)formal treatment of some of the concepts in Socratic dialogue.
For M.C., the major part of the work on this article was carried out while he was affiliated with the Interdisciplinary Centre for Security, Reliability and Trust at the University of Luxembourg. His research was supported by the National Research Fund, Luxembourg (LAAMI project), as well as by the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC, UK), grant ref. EP/J012084/1 (SAsSY project). For S.V., the major part of the work on this article was carried out while he was affiliated with the Computer Science and Communication Research Unit at the University of Luxembourg. He worked on this article during the tenure of an ERCIM Alain Bensoussan Fellowship Programme, which is supported by the Marie Curie Co-funding of Regional, National and International Programmes (COFUND) of the European Commission. During this time, he was also funded by the National Research Fund, Luxembourg. When finishing the work on this article, he was a CRNS researcher affiliated with CRIL
- abstract argumentation
- preferred semantics
- Socratic dialogue
- computational complexity