An axiomatic treatment of non-monotonic arguments
Abstract
An axiomatic theory of non-monotonic consequence relations patterned upon some finitistic ideas going back to Gentzen was suggested by Gabbay [1985]. 1 More recently, an infinitistic approach patterned upon Tarski’s theory of consequence operation was examined by Makinson [l98.]. We compare the two approaches and examine them vis-`a-vis some intuitive adequacy conditions. An enlarged version of this note will appear in Studia Logica , in particular the reader is referred to it for the proofs of the results stated here