Skip to main content
Log in

Reasoning About Permitted Announcements

  • Published:
Journal of Philosophical Logic Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We formalize what it means to have permission to say something. We adapt the dynamic logic of permission by van der Meyden (J Log Comput 6(3):465–479, 1996) to the case where atomic actions are public truthful announcements. We also add a notion of obligation. Our logic is an extension of the logic of public announcements introduced by Plaza (1989) with dynamic modal operators for permission and for obligation. We axiomatize the logic and show that it is decidable.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ågotnes, T., Balbiani, P., van Ditmarsch, H., & Seban, P. (2010). Group announcement logic. Journal of Applied Logic, 8, 62–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Aucher, G., Boella, G., & van der Torre, L. (2010). Privacy policies with modal logic: The dynamic turn. In G. Governatori, & G. Sartor (Eds.), Proceedings of 10th DEON. LNCS 6181 (pp. 196–213). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Balbiani, P., van Ditmarsch, H., & Seban, P. (2009). Reasoning about permitted announcements. In A. Herzig, & E. Lorini (Eds.), (Electronic) proceedings of: ESSLLI 2009 workshop logical methods for social concepts, Bordeaux, France.

  4. Baltag, A., Moss, L.S., & Solecki, S. (1998). The logic of public announcements, common knowledge, and private suspicions. In I. Gilboa (Ed.), Proceedings of the 7th conference on theoretical aspects of rationality and knowledge (TARK 98) (pp. 43–56).

  5. Baltag, A., van Ditmarsch, H., & Moss, L.S. (2008). Epistemic logic and information update. In J. van Benthem, & P. Adriaans (Eds.), Handbook on the philosophy of information (pp. 361–456). Amsterdam: Elsevier.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  6. Blackburn, P., de Rijke, M., & Venema, Y. (2001). Modal logic. Cambridge tracts in theoretical computer science 53. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Boh, I. (1993). Epistemic logic in the later middle ages. Evanston, IL: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Chisholm, R.M. (1964). The ethics of requirement. American Philosophical Quarterly, 1, 147–153.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Fagin, R., Halpern, J.Y., Moses, Y., & Vardi, M.Y. (1995). Reasoning about knowledge. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Fischer, M., & Ladner, R. (1979). Propositional dynamic logic of regular programs. Journal of Computer and System Sciences, 18(2), 194–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Horty, J.F. (2001). Agency and deontic logic. London, UK: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  12. Hoshi, T. (2008). Logics of public announcements with announcement protocols. Manuscript. Philosophy Department, Stanford University.

  13. Mally, E. (1926). Grundgesetze des Sollens: Elemente der Logik des Willens. Leuschner und Lubensky, Universitaäts-Buchhandlung, Graz.

  14. Meyer, J.-J.Ch. (1987). A different approach to deontic logic: Deontic logic viewed as a variant of dynamic logic. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic, 29(1), 109–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Moore, G.E. (1942). A reply to my critics. In P.A. Schilpp (Ed.), The philosophy of G.E. Moore (pp. 535–677). The Library of Living Philosophers (volume 4). Evanston, IL: Northwestern University.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Parikh, R., & Ramanujam, R. (2003). A knowledge based semantics of messages. Journal of Logic, Language and Information, 12, 453–467.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Plaza, J.A. (1989). Logics of public communications. In M.L. Emrich, M.S. Pfeifer, M. Hadzikadic, & Z.W. Ras (Eds.), Proceedings of the 4th international symposium on methodologies for intelligent systems: Poster session program (pp. 201–216). Oak Ridge National Laboratory.

  18. Plaza, J.A.: Logics of public communications. Synthese, 158(2), 165–179. (2007). Reprint of Plaza’s 1989 workshop paper.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Pucella, R., & Weissman, V. (2004). Reasoning about dynamic policies. In I. Walukiewicz (Ed.), FOSSACS 2004. LNCS 2987 (pp. 453–467). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Ross, A. (1941). Imperatives and logic. Theoria, 7, 53–71.

    Google Scholar 

  21. van Benthem, J., Gerbrandy, J.D., Hoshi, T., & Pacuit, E. (2009). Merging frameworks for interaction. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 38, 491–526.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. van der Meyden, R. (1996). The dynamic logic of permission. Journal of Logic and Computation, 6(3), 465–479.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. van Ditmarsch, H., & French, T. (2009). Simulation and information. In J. Broersen, & J.-J. Meyer (Eds.), Knowledge representation for agents and multi-agent systems. LNAI 5605. Presented at LOFT 2008 and KRAMAS 2008 (pp. 51–65). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  24. van Ditmarsch, H., van der Hoek, W., & Kooi, B.P. (2007). Dynamic epistemic logic. Synthese Library (vol. 337). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  25. von Wright, G.H. (1951). An essay in modal logic. Amsterdam: North Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Wang, Y. (2010). Epistemic modelling and protocol dynamics. PhD thesis, Universiteit van Amsterdam.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to P. Seban.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Balbiani, P., Seban, P. Reasoning About Permitted Announcements. J Philos Logic 40, 445–472 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10992-011-9187-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10992-011-9187-1

Keywords

Navigation