Search results for 'Deontic logic' (try it on Scholar)

1000+ found
Sort by:
See also:
  1. Sven Ove Hansson (1997). Situationist Deontic Logic. Journal of Philosophical Logic 26 (4):423-448.score: 246.0
    Situationist deontic logic is a model of that fraction of normative discourse which refers to only one situation and one set of alternatives. As we can see from a whole series of well-known paradoxes, standard deontic logic (SDL) is seriously mistaken even at the situationist level. In this paper it is shown how a more realistic deontic logic can be based on the assumption that prescriptive predicates satisfy the property of contranegativity. A satisfactory account (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Mathieu Beirlaen, Christian Straßer & Joke Meheus (2013). An Inconsistency-Adaptive Deontic Logic for Normative Conflicts. Journal of Philosophical Logic 42 (2):285-315.score: 246.0
    We present the inconsistency-adaptive deontic logic DP r , a nonmonotonic logic for dealing with conflicts between normative statements. On the one hand, this logic does not lead to explosion in view of normative conflicts such as O A ∧ O ∼A, O A ∧ P ∼A or even O A ∧ ∼O A. On the other hand, DP r still verifies all intuitively reliable inferences valid in Standard Deontic Logic (SDL). DP r interprets (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Paul McNamara (2006). Deontic Logic. In Dov Gabbay & John Woods (eds.), The Handbook of the History of Logic, vol. 7: Logic and the Modalities in the Twentieth Century. Elsevier Press. 197-288.score: 246.0
    Overview of fundamental work in deontic logic.
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Gert-Jan C. Lokhorst (2013). An Intuitionistic Reformulation of Mally's Deontic Logic. Journal of Philosophical Logic 42 (4):635-641.score: 246.0
    In 1926, Ernst Mally proposed a number of deontic postulates. He added them as axioms to classical propositional logic. The resulting system was unsatisfactory because it had the consequence that A is the case if and only if it is obligatory that A. We present an intuitionistic reformulation of Mally’s deontic logic. We show that this system does not provide the just-mentioned objectionable theorem while most of the theorems that Mally considered acceptable are still derivable. The (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Gert-Jan C. Lokhorst (2014). Mally's Deontic Logic: Reducibility and Semantics. Journal of Philosophical Logic:1-11.score: 246.0
    We discuss three aspects of the intuitionistic reformulation of Mally’s deontic logic that was recently proposed (Journal of Philosophical Logic 42, 635–641, (2013)). First, this reformulation is more similar to Standard Deontic Logic than appears at first sight: like Standard Deontic Logic, it is Kanger reducible and Anderson reducible to alethic logic and it has a semantical interpretation that can be read in deontic terms. Second, this reformulation has an extension that (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Martin Mose Bentzen (2014). Action Type Deontic Logic. Journal of Logic, Language and Information:1-18.score: 246.0
    A new deontic logic, Action Type Deontic Logic, is presented. To motivate this logic, a number of benchmark cases are shown, representing inferences a deontic logic should validate. Some of the benchmark cases are singled out for further comments and some formal approaches to deontic reasoning are evaluated with respect to the benchmark cases. After that follows an informal introduction to the ideas behind the formal semantics, focussing on the distinction between action (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Alessio Moretti (2009). The Geometry of Standard Deontic Logic. Logica Universalis 3 (1):19-57.score: 240.0
    Whereas geometrical oppositions (logical squares and hexagons) have been so far investigated in many fields of modal logic (both abstract and applied), the oppositional geometrical side of “deontic logic” (the logic of “obligatory”, “forbidden”, “permitted”, . . .) has rather been neglected. Besides the classical “deontic square” (the deontic counterpart of Aristotle’s “logical square”), some interesting attempts have nevertheless been made to deepen the geometrical investigation of the deontic oppositions: Kalinowski (La logique des (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Paul McNamara, Deontic Logic. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.score: 240.0
  9. Andrew J. I. Jones & Marek Sergot (1992). Deontic Logic in the Representation of Law: Towards a Methodology. [REVIEW] Artificial Intelligence and Law 1 (1):45-64.score: 240.0
    There seems to be no clear consensus in the existing literature about the role of deontic logic in legal knowledge representation — in large part, we argue, because of an apparent misunderstanding of what deontic logic is, and a misplaced preoccupation with the surface formulation of legislative texts. Our aim in this paper is to indicate, first, which aspects of legal reasoning are addressed by deontic logic, and then to sketch out the beginnings of (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. Newton C. A. Costa & Walter A. Carnielli (1986). On Paraconsistent Deontic Logic. Philosophia 16 (3-4):293-305.score: 240.0
    This paper develops the first deontic logic in the context of paraconsistent logics.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. Edwin D. Mares & Paul McNamara (1997). Supererogation in Deontic Logic: Metatheory for DWE and Some Close Neighbours. [REVIEW] Studia Logica 59 (3):397-415.score: 240.0
    In "Doing Well Enough: Toward a Logic for Common Sense Morality", Paul McNamara sets out a semantics for a deontic logic which contains the operator It is supererogatory that. As well as having a binary accessibility relation on worlds, that semantics contains a relative ordering relation, . For worlds u, v and w, we say that u w v when v is at least as good as u according to the standards of w. In this paper we (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. John Francis Horty (2001). Agency and Deontic Logic. Oxford University Press.score: 240.0
    John Horty effectively develops deontic logic (the logic of ethical concepts like obligation and permission) against the background of a formal theory of agency. He incorporates certain elements of decision theory to set out a new deontic account of what agents ought to do under various conditions over extended periods of time. Offering a conceptual rather than technical emphasis, Horty's framework allows a number of recent issues from moral theory to be set out clearly and discussed (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. Rosja Mastop (2011). Norm Performatives and Deontic Logic. European Journal of Analytic Philosophy 7 (2):83-105.score: 240.0
    Deontic logic is standardly conceived as the logic of true statements about the existence of obligations and permissions. In his last writings on the subject, G. H. von Wright criticized this view of deontic logic, stressing the rationality of norm imposition as the proper foundation of deontic logic. The present paper is an attempt to advance such an account of deontic logic using the formal apparatus of update semantics and dynamic (...). That is, we first define norm systems and a semantics of norm performatives as transformations of the norm system. Then a static modal logic for norm propositions is defined on that basis. In the course of this exposition we stress the performative nature of (i) free choice permission, (ii) the sealing legal principle and (iii) the social nature of permission. That is, (i) granting a disjunctive permission means granting permission for both disjuncts; (ii) non-prohibition does not entail permission, but the authority can declare that whatever he does not forbid is thereby permitted; and (iii) granting permission to one person means that all others are committed to not prevent the invocation of that permission. (shrink)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. Mathijs Boer, Dov M. Gabbay, Xavier Parent & Marija Slavkovic (2012). Two Dimensional Standard Deontic Logic [Including a Detailed Analysis of the 1985 Jones–Pörn Deontic Logic System]. Synthese 187 (2):623-660.score: 240.0
    This paper offers a two dimensional variation of Standard Deontic Logic SDL, which we call 2SDL. Using 2SDL we can show that we can overcome many of the difficulties that SDL has in representing linguistic sets of Contrary-to-Duties (known as paradoxes) including the Chisholm, Ross, Good Samaritan and Forrester paradoxes. We note that many dimensional logics have been around since 1947, and so 2SDL could have been presented already in the 1970s. Better late than never! As a detailed (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. Johan Benthem, Davide Grossi & Fenrong Liu (2014). Priority Structures in Deontic Logic. Theoria 80 (2):116-152.score: 240.0
    This article proposes a systematic application of recent developments in the logic of preference to a number of topics in deontic logic. The key junction is the well-known Hansson conditional for dyadic obligations. These conditionals are generalized by pairing them with reasoning about syntactic priority structures. The resulting two-level approach to obligations is tested first against standard scenarios of contrary-to-duty obligations, leading also to a generalization for the Kanger-Anderson reduction of deontic logic. Next, the priority (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  16. Stefania Centrone (2013). Notes on Mally's Deontic Logic and the Collapse of {Varvec{Seinsollen}} and {Varvec{Sein}}. [REVIEW] Synthese 190 (18):4095-4116.score: 240.0
    This paper analyzes Mally’s system of deontic logic, introduced in his The Basic Laws of Ought: Elements of the Logic of Willing (1926). We discuss Mally’s text against the background of some contributions in the literature which show that Mally’s axiomatic system for deontic logic is flawed, in so far as it derives, for an arbitrary A, the theorem “A ought to be the case if and only if A is the case”, which represents a (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  17. M. Abraham, D. M. Gabbay & U. Schild (2011). Obligations and Prohibitions in Talmudic Deontic Logic. Artificial Intelligence and Law 19 (2-3):117-148.score: 240.0
    This paper examines the deontic logic of the Talmud. We shall find, by looking at examples, that at first approximation we need deontic logic with several connectives: O T A Talmudic obligation F T A Talmudic prohibition F D A Standard deontic prohibition O D A Standard deontic obligation. In classical logic one would have expected that deontic obligation O D is definable by $O_DA \equiv F_D\neg A$ and that O T and (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  18. Mathijs de Boer, Dov M. Gabbay, Xavier Parent & Marija Slavkovic (2012). Two Dimensional Standard Deontic Logic [Including a Detailed Analysis of the 1985 Jones–Pörn Deontic Logic System]. Synthese 187 (2):623-660.score: 240.0
    This paper offers a two dimensional variation of Standard Deontic Logic SDL, which we call 2SDL. Using 2SDL we can show that we can overcome many of the difficulties that SDL has in representing linguistic sets of Contrary-to-Duties (known as paradoxes) including the Chisholm, Ross, Good Samaritan and Forrester paradoxes. We note that many dimensional logics have been around since 1947, and so 2SDL could have been presented already in the 1970s. Better late than never! As a detailed (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  19. Jaakko Hintikka (1971). Some Main Problems of Deontic Logic. In Risto Hilpinen (ed.), Deontic Logic: Introductory and Systematic Readings. Sold and Distributed in the U.S.A. And Canada by Kluwer Boston. 59-104.score: 240.0
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  20. Daniel Rönnedal (2010). Dyadic Deontic Logic and Semantic Tableaux. Logic and Logical Philosophy 18 (3-4):221-252.score: 230.0
    The purpose of this paper is to develop a class of semantic tableau systems for some dyadic deontic logics. We will consider 16 different pure dyadic deontic tableau systems and 32 different alethic dyadic deontic tableau systems. Possible world semantics is used to interpret our formal languages. Some relationships between our systems and well known dyadic deontic logics in the literature are pointed out and soundness results are obtained for every tableau system. Completeness results are obtained (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  21. Peter Geach (1958). Imperative and Deontic Logic. Analysis 18 (3):49-56.score: 222.0
    The author contends that moral utterances and imperatives have different logical features. He discusses r m hare's "language of morals" in terms of his distinction between plain imperatives and deontic utterances. (staff).
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  22. Christian Straßer (2010). An Adaptive Logic Framework for Conditional Obligations and Deontic Dilemmas. Logic and Logical Philosophy 19 (1-2):95-128.score: 216.0
    Lou Goble proposed powerful conditional deontic logics (CDPM) that are able to deal with deontic conflicts by means of restricting the inheritance principle. One of the central problems for dyadic deontic logics is to properly treat the restricted applicability of the principle “strengthening the antecedent”. In most cases it is desirable to derive from an obligation A under condition B, that A is also obliged under condition B and C. However, there are important counterexamples. Goble proposed a (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  23. Piotr Kulicki & Robert Trypuz, Doing the Right Things–Trivalence in Deontic Action Logic. Trivalent Logics and Their Applications.score: 212.0
    Trivalence is quite natural for deontic action logic, where actions are treated as good, neutral or bad.We present the ideas of trivalent deontic logic after J. Kalinowski and its realisation in a 3-valued logic of M. Fisher and two systems designed by the authors of the paper: a 4-valued logic inspired by N. Belnap’s logic of truth and information and a 3-valued logic based on nondeterministic matrices. Moreover, we combine Kalinowski’s idea of (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  24. Todd Bernard Weber (2002). The Moral Dilemmas Debate, Deontic Logic, and the Impotence of Argument. Argumentation 16 (4):459-472.score: 210.0
    In this paper I argue for modesty concerning what theoretical reason can accomplish in the moral dilemmas debate. Specifically, I contend that philosophers' conclusions for or against moral dilemmas are driven less by rational argument and more by how the moral world intuitively appears to them.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  25. Jeroen van Den Hoven & Gert-Jan Lokhorst (2002). Deontic Logic and Computer-Supported Computer Ethics. In James Moor & Terrell Ward Bynum (eds.), Cyberphilosophy: The Intersection of Philosophy and Computing. Blackwell Pub.. 376-386.score: 210.0
  26. Jörg Hansen (2006). The Paradoxes of Deontic Logic: Alive and Kicking. Theoria 72 (3):221-232.score: 210.0
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  27. Piotr Kulicki & Robert Trypuz (2012). How to Build a Deontic Action Logic. In Michal Pelis & Vit Puncochar (eds.), The Logica Yearbook 2011. College Publications.score: 210.0
    The aim of the paper is to point out the modelling choices that lead to different systems of deontic action logic. A kind of a roadmap is presented. On the one hand it can help the reader to find the deontic logic appropriate for an intended application relying on the information considering the way in which a deontic logic represents actions and how it characterises deontic properties in relation to (the representation of) actions. (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  28. Robert Trypuz & Piotr Kulicki (2011). A Norm-Giver Meets Deontic Action Logic. Logic and Logical Philosophy 20 (1-2):2011.score: 210.0
    In the paper we present a formal system motivated by a specific methodology of creating norms. According to the methodology, a norm-giver before establishing a set of norms should create a picture of the agent by creating his repertoire of actions. Then, knowing what the agent can do in particular situations, the norm-giver regulates these actions by assigning deontic qualifications to each of them. The set of norms created for each situation should respect (1) generally valid deontic principles (...)
    Direct download (13 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  29. Lennart Åqvist (2014). Deontic Tense Logic With Historical Necessity, Frame Constants, and a Solution to the Epistemic Obligation Paradox (The “Knower”). Theoria 80 (3).score: 210.0
    In an earlier paper by the author, Åqvist (1999), I presented an approach to the logic of historical necessity, or inevitability, in the sense of a “two-dimensional” combination of tense and modal logic for worlds, or histories, with the same time order, known as T × W logic. Distinctive features of that approach were, apart from its two-dimensionality, its being based on discrete and finite time, and its use of so-called systematic frame constants in order to enable (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  30. Risto Hilpinen (ed.) (1981). Deontic Logic: Introductory and Systematic Readings. Sold and Distributed in the U.S.A. And Canada by Kluwer Boston.score: 210.0
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  31. Krister Segerberg (2012). DΔL: A Dynamic Deontic Logic. Synthese 185 (S1):1-17.score: 192.0
    This paper suggests that it should be possible to develop dynamic deontic logic as a counterpart to the very successful development of dynamic doxastic logic (or dynamic epistemic logic, as it is more often called). The ambition, arrived at towards the end of the paper, is to give formal representations of agentive concepts such as “the agent is about to do (has just done) α ” as well as of deontic concepts such as “it is (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  32. V. Wiegel, M. J. Van den Hoven & G. J. C. Lokhorst (2005). Privacy, Deontic Epistemic Action Logic and Software Agents. Ethics and Information Technology 7 (4):251-264.score: 192.0
    In this paper we present an executable approach to model interactions between agents that involve sensitive, privacy-related information. The approach is formal and based on deontic, epistemic and action logic. It is conceptually related to the Belief-Desire-Intention model of Bratman. Our approach uses the concept of sphere as developed by Waltzer to capture the notion that information is provided mostly with restrictions regarding its application. We use software agent technology to create an executable approach. Our agents hold beliefs (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  33. Sven Ove Hansson (1990). Preference-Based Deontic Logic (PDL). Journal of Philosophical Logic 19 (1):75 - 93.score: 186.0
    A new possible world semantics for deontic logic is proposed. Its intuitive basis is that prohibitive predicates (such as "wrong" and "prohibited") have the property of negativity, i.e. that what is worse than something wrong is itself wrong. The logic of prohibitive predicates is built on this property and on preference logic. Prescriptive predicates are defined in terms of prohibitive predicates, according to the wellknown formula "ought" = "wrong that not". In this preference-based deontic (...) (PDL), those theorems that give rise to the paradoxes of standard deontic logic (SDL) are not obtained. (E.g., O(p & q) → Op & Oq and Op → O(p v q)) are theorems of SDL but not of PDL.) The more plausible theorems of SDL, however, can be derived in PDL. (shrink)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  34. Lou Goble (2000). Multiplex Semantics for Deontic Logic. Nordic Journal of Philosophical Logic 5 (2):113-134.score: 186.0
    This multiplex semantics incorporates multiple relations of deontic accessibility or multiple preference rankings on alternative worlds to represent distinct normative standards. This provides a convenient framework for deontic logic that allows conflicts of obligation, due either to conflicts between normative standards or to incoherence within a single standard. With the multiplex structures, two general senses of "ought" may be distinguished, an indefinite sense under which something is obligatory when it is enjoined by some normative standard and a (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  35. Wolfgang Spohn (1975). An Analysis of Hansson's Dyadic Deontic Logic. Journal of Philosophical Logic 4 (2):237 - 252.score: 186.0
    Recently, Bengt Hansson presented a paper about dyadic deontic logic,2 criticizing some purely axiomatic systems of dyadic deontic logic and proposing three purely semantical systems of dyadic deontic logic which he confidently called dyadic standard systems of deontic logic (DSDL1–3). Here I shall discuss the third by far most interesting system DSDL3 which is operating with preference relations. First, I shall describe this semantical system (Sections 1.1–1.3). Then I shall give an axiomatic (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  36. Christian Strasser (2010). An Adaptive Logic Framework for Conditional Obligations and Deontic Dilemmas. Logic and Logical Philosophy 19 (1-2):95-128.score: 186.0
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  37. Xavier Parent (forthcoming). Maximality Vs. Optimality in Dyadic Deontic Logic. Journal of Philosophical Logic:1-28.score: 182.0
    This paper reports completeness results for dyadic deontic logics in the tradition of Hansson’s systems. There are two ways to understand the core notion of best antecedent-worlds, which underpins such systems. One is in terms of maximality, and the other in terms of optimality. Depending on the choice being made, one gets different evaluation rules for the deontic modalities, but also different versions of the so-called limit assumption. Four of them are disentangled, and compared. The main observation of (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  38. Michael J. Almeida (1990). Deontic Logic and the Possibility of Moral Conflict. Erkenntnis 33 (1):57 - 71.score: 180.0
    Standard dyadic deontic logic (as well as standard deontic logic) has recently come under attack by moral philosophers who maintain that the axioms of standard dyadic deontic logic are biased against moral theories which generate moral conflicts. Since moral theories which generate conflicts are at least logically tenable, it is argued, standard dyadic deontic logic should be modified so that the set of logically possible moral theories includes those which generate such conflicts. (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  39. Philip Hugly & Charles Sayward (1990). Moral Relativism and Deontic Logic. Synthese 85 (1):139 - 152.score: 180.0
    If a native of India asserts "Killing cattle is wrong" and a Nebraskan asserts "Killing cattle is not wrong", and both judgments agree with their respective moralities and both moralities are internally consistent, then the moral relativist says both judgments are fully correct. At this point relativism bifurcates. One branch which we call content relativism denies that the two people are contradicting each other. The idea is that the content of a moral judgment is a function of the overall moral (...)
    Direct download (10 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  40. Gabriella Pigozzi, J. Hansen & Leon van der Torre, Ten Philosophical Problems in Deontic Logic.score: 180.0
    The paper discusses ten philosophical problems in deontic logic: how to formally represent norms, when a set of norms may be termed ‘coherent’, how to deal with normative conflicts, how contraryto-duty obligations can be appropriately modeled, how dyadic deontic operators may be redefined to relate to sets of norms instead of preference relations between possible worlds, how various concepts of permission can be accommodated, how meaning postulates and counts-as conditionals can be taken into account, and how sets (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  41. Albert J. J. Anglberger (2008). Dynamic Deontic Logic and its Paradoxes. Studia Logica 89 (3):427 - 435.score: 180.0
    In Meyer’s promising account [7] deontic logic is reduced to a dynamic logic. Meyer claims that with his account “we get rid of most (if not all) of the nasty paradoxes that have plagued traditional deontic logic.” But as was shown by van der Meyden in [4], Meyer’s logic also contains a paradoxical formula. In this paper we will show that another paradox can be proven, one which also effects Meyer’s “solution” to contrary to (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  42. Jan Woleński (1990). Deontic Logic and Possible Worlds Semantics: A Historical Sketch. Studia Logica 49 (2):273 - 282.score: 180.0
    This paper describes and compares the first step in modern semantic theory for deontic logic which appeared in works of Stig Kanger, Jaakko Hintikka, Richard Montague and Saul Kripke in late 50s and early 60s. Moreover, some further developments as well as systematizations are also noted.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  43. Sven Ove Hansson (2006). Ideal Worlds — Wishful Thinking in Deontic Logic. Studia Logica 82 (3):329 - 336.score: 180.0
    The ideal world semantics of standard deontic logic identifies our obligations with how we would act in an ideal world. However, to act as if one lived in an ideal world is bad moral advice, associated with wishful thinking rather than well-considered moral deliberation. Ideal world semantics gives rise to implausible logical principles, and the metaphysical arguments that have been put forward in its favour turn out to be based on a too limited view of truth-functional representation. It (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  44. Lennart Åqvist (1964). Interpretations of Deontic Logic. Mind 73 (290):246-253.score: 180.0
    The author is concerned with a minimal system dl of deontic logic, His main purpose being to draw attention to the existence of interpretations of dl that give rise to various systems of what may be called "atheoretical logic." by this we understand logical systems dealing with expressions that are--Very probably at least--Neither true nor false, Such as sentences expressing promises, Intentions, Wishes, Commands, And similar things. As it is well known, The status of atheoretical logic (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  45. G.-J. C. Lokhorst & L. Goble (2004). Mally's Deontic Logic. Grazer Philosophische Studien 67 (1):37-57.score: 180.0
    In 1926, Mally presented the first formal system of deontic logic. His system had several consequences which Mally regarded as surprising but defensible. It also, however, has the consequence that A is obligatory if and only if A is the case, which is unacceptable from the point of view of any reasonable deontic logic. We describe Mally's system and discuss how it might reasonably be repaired.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  46. Peter B. M. Vranas, New Foundations for Deontic Logic: A Preliminary Sketch.score: 180.0
    I outline six components of a comprehensive proposal for overhauling the foundations of deontic logic. (1) Actions and prescriptions are temporally indexed; more precisely, they attach to nodes of a tree in a branching time structure. (2) Actions are (modeled as) sets of branches and can be coarse- or fine-grained depending on whether or not they have proper subsets which are also actions. (3) Prescriptions have satisfaction and violation sets; these are sets of branches which may—but need not—be (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  47. John F. Horty, Precedent, Deontic Logic, and Inheritance.score: 180.0
    The purpose of this paper is to e»tahlish some connections between precedent-based reasoning as it is studied in the field of Artificial Intelligence and Law, particularly in the work of Ashley, and two other fields: deontic logic and nonmonotonic logic. First, a deontic logic is described that allows lor sensible reasoning in the presence of conflicting norms. Second, a simplified version of Ashley's account of precedent-based reasoning is reformulated within the framework of this deontic (...)
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  48. Georg Henrik von Wright (1981). Deontic Logic and the Theory of Conditions. In Risto Hilpinen (ed.), Deontic Logic: Introductory and Systematic Readings. Sold and Distributed in the U.S.A. And Canada by Kluwer Boston. 3 - 31.score: 180.0
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  49. Leon Gumański (1980). On Deontic Logic. Studia Logica 39 (1):63 - 75.score: 180.0
    Some requirements concerning deontic logic are formulated and discussed. Stress is laid on the need to distinguish between theories and deductive systems. It is argued that deontic theories need not be closed under the rule of detachment. Two deontic calculi, called DSC1, DSC2, are presented and talked over.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
1 — 50 / 1000