Graduate studies at Western
Synthese 108 (2):269 - 307 (1996)
|Abstract||The purpose of this paper is to explore a new deontic operator for representing what an agent ought to do; the operator is cast against the background of a modal treatment of action developed by Nuel Belnap and Michael Perloff, which itself relies on Arthur Prior's indeterministic tense logic. The analysis developed here of what an agent ought to do is based on a dominance ordering adapted from the decision theoretic study of choice under uncertainty to the present account of action. It is shown that this analysis gives rise to a normal deontic operator, and that the result is superior to an analysis that identifies what an agent ought to do with what it ought to be that the agent does.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Markus E. Schlosser (2008). Agent-Causation and Agential Control. Philosophical Explorations 11 (1):3-21.
Michael J. Zimmerman (1996). The Concept of Moral Obligation. Cambridge University Press.
Shaun Nichols (2004). The Folk Psychology of Free Will: Fits and Starts. Mind and Language 19 (5):473-502.
Lennart Åqvist (2002). Old Foundations for the Logic of Agency and Action. Studia Logica 72 (3):313-338.
Beth Huffer (2007). Actions and Outcomes: Two Aspects of Agency. Synthese 157 (2):241 - 265.
Stefan Wölfl (2002). Propositional Q-Logic. Journal of Philosophical Logic 31 (5):387-414.
Churn-Jung Liau (2001). A Logical Analysis of the Relationship Between Commitment and Obligation. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 10 (2):237-261.
John Francis Horty (2001). Agency and Deontic Logic. Oxford University Press.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads7 ( #142,359 of 722,946 )
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?