argument: has quality good

Related concepts

Parents	straw man Weight: 0.64 , question Weight: 0.62 , complaint Weight: 0.60 , society Weight: 0.59
Siblings	favor Weight: 0.50 , foo Weight: 0.44 , answer Weight: 0.32 , fairness Weight: 0.31 , problem Weight: 0.31

Related properties

Property	Similarity
has quality good	1.00
has quality bad	0.96
be good	0.86

Priors about this statement

Cues

Evidence

Clauses

Plausibility inference from child typicality

0.56

Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.72

Plausible(question, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.57

¬ Typical(argument, has quality good)

0.38

Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.67
Similarity weight: 0.86

Evidence: 0.42

Plausible(complaint, be good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.57

¬ Typical(argument, has quality good)

0.33

Rule weight: 0.66
Evidence weight: 0.49
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.11

Plausible(complaint, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.57

¬ Typical(argument, has quality good)

Plausibility inheritance from parent to child

0.09

Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.93
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.39

Plausible(argument, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.11

¬ Plausible(complaint, has quality good)

0.06

Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.74
Similarity weight: 0.86

Evidence: 0.39

Plausible(argument, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.42

¬ Plausible(complaint, be good)

0.05

Rule weight: 0.09
Evidence weight: 0.56
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.39

Plausible(argument, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.72

¬ Plausible(question, has quality good)

Remarkability exclusitivity betweem a parent and a child

0.55

Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.96
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.29

¬ Remarkable(argument, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.15

¬ Remarkable(complaint, has quality good)

0.45

Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.78
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.29

¬ Remarkable(argument, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.78

¬ Remarkable(question, has quality good)

0.44

Rule weight: 0.58
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 0.86

Evidence: 0.29

¬ Remarkable(argument, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.37

¬ Remarkable(complaint, be good)

Remarkability exclusitivity between siblings

0.11

Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.29

¬ Remarkable(argument, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.67

¬ Remarkable(favor, has quality good)

0.10

Rule weight: 0.13
Evidence weight: 0.79
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.29

¬ Remarkable(argument, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.74

¬ Remarkable(foo, has quality good)

Remarkability from parent implausibility

0.39

Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.92
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.72

Plausible(question, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.29

Remarkable(argument, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.39

¬ Plausible(argument, has quality good)

0.32

Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.75
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.11

Plausible(complaint, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.29

Remarkable(argument, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.39

¬ Plausible(argument, has quality good)

0.30

Rule weight: 0.42
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.86

Evidence: 0.42

Plausible(complaint, be good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.29

Remarkable(argument, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.39

¬ Plausible(argument, has quality good)

Remarkability from sibling implausibility

0.52

Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.87
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.39

Plausible(argument, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.74

Remarkable(foo, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.83

¬ Plausible(foo, has quality good)

0.50

Rule weight: 0.60
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.39

Plausible(argument, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.67

Remarkable(favor, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.80

¬ Plausible(favor, has quality good)

Salient implies Plausible

0.23

Rule weight: 0.28
Evidence weight: 0.81
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.39

Plausible(argument, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.31

¬ Salient(argument, has quality good)

Similarity expansion

0.52

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 0.96

Evidence: 0.57

Typical(argument, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.85

¬ Typical(argument, has quality bad)

0.50

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.62
Similarity weight: 0.96

Evidence: 0.29

Remarkable(argument, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.53

¬ Remarkable(argument, has quality bad)

0.47

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.64
Similarity weight: 0.86

Evidence: 0.57

Typical(argument, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.84

¬ Typical(argument, be good)

0.45

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.61
Similarity weight: 0.86

Evidence: 0.29

Remarkable(argument, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.54

¬ Remarkable(argument, be good)

0.43

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.53
Similarity weight: 0.96

Evidence: 0.39

Plausible(argument, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.77

¬ Plausible(argument, has quality bad)

0.39

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.53
Similarity weight: 0.86

Evidence: 0.39

Plausible(argument, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.77

¬ Plausible(argument, be good)

0.35

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.44
Similarity weight: 0.96

Evidence: 0.31

Salient(argument, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.82

¬ Salient(argument, has quality bad)

0.32

Rule weight: 0.85
Evidence weight: 0.43
Similarity weight: 0.86

Evidence: 0.31

Salient(argument, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.82

¬ Salient(argument, be good)

Typical and Remarkable implies Salient

0.12

Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.89
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.31

Salient(argument, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.57

¬ Typical(argument, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.29

¬ Remarkable(argument, has quality good)

Typical implies Plausible

0.31

Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.65
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.39

Plausible(argument, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.57

¬ Typical(argument, has quality good)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between a parent and a child

0.46

Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.90
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.29

¬ Remarkable(argument, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.35

¬ Typical(complaint, has quality good)

0.41

Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.80
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.29

¬ Remarkable(argument, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.71

¬ Typical(question, has quality good)

0.37

Rule weight: 0.51
Evidence weight: 0.84
Similarity weight: 0.86

Evidence: 0.29

¬ Remarkable(argument, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.56

¬ Typical(complaint, be good)

Typicality and Rermarkability incompatibility between siblings

0.10

Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.29

¬ Remarkable(argument, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.84

¬ Typical(favor, has quality good)

0.10

Rule weight: 0.14
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.29

¬ Remarkable(argument, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.84

¬ Typical(foo, has quality good)

Typicality inheritance from parent to child

0.41

Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.85
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.57

Typical(argument, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.35

¬ Typical(complaint, has quality good)

0.34

Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.70
Similarity weight: 1.00

Evidence: 0.57

Typical(argument, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.71

¬ Typical(question, has quality good)

0.32

Rule weight: 0.48
Evidence weight: 0.76
Similarity weight: 0.86

Evidence: 0.57

Typical(argument, has quality good) ⋁

Evidence: 0.56

¬ Typical(complaint, be good)