Abstract
Ross’s puzzle (Ross, 1941) and the paradox of Free Choice Permission (Kamp, 1973), puzzles involving disjunction under deontic operators, have received wide discussion in recent work in natural language semantics. First, I contrast two opposed modal views—call them the “box-diamond” theory and EU theory—that form two poles of the contemporary debate. The opposition between them is underwritten by distinct, well-developed conceptions of what it is for an action to be good. I present an axiomatization of obligation and permissibility—of ‘ought’ and ‘may’—that is neutral between the two theories. Adding in the interpretation of ‘or’ as Boolean union, we get the received dialectic in the literature between the two theories on explaining Ross and FCP. Factoring out this assumption, we get a picture of how far apart the two theories are as theories of value, with no questions begged about the semantics of sentential disjunction.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Aher, M.: Free choice in deontic inquisitive semantics (DIS). In: Aloni, M., Kimmelman, V., Roelofsen, F., Sassoon, G.W., Schulz, K., Westera, M. (eds.) Amsterdam Colloquium 2011. LNCS, vol. 7218, pp. 22–31. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)
Cariani, F.: ‘ought’ and resolution semantics. Noûs, 1–28 (2011)
Ciardelli, I., Aloni, M.: A logical account of free choice imperatives. In: Aloni, M., Franke, M., Roelofsen, F. (eds.) The Dynamic, Inquisitive, and Visionary Life of φ, ?φ, and \(\lozenge \phi\): a festschrift for Jeroen Groenendijk, Martin Stokjof, and Frank Veltman (2012)
Ciardelli, I., Groenendijk, J., Roelofsen, F.: Inquisitive semantics: a new notion of meaning. Language and Linguistics Compass 7(9), 459–476 (2013)
Davies, M., Humberstone, L.: Two notions of necessity. Philosophical Studies 38(1), 1–30 (1980)
Evans, G.: Reference and contingency. The Monist 62, 161–189 (1977)
von Fintel, K.: The best we can (expect to) get?: Challenges to the classic semantics for deontic modals (February 2012), Central APA session on Deontic Modals
Follesdal, D., Hilpinen, R.: Deontic logic: An introduction. In: Hilpinen, R. (ed.) Deontic Logic: Introductory and Systematic Readings. Dordrecht Reidel (1971)
Goble, L.: Utilitarian deontic logic. Philosophical Studies 82(3), 317–357 (1996)
Jackson, F., Pargetter, R.: Oughts, options and actualism. The Philosophical Review 95(2), 233–255 (1986)
Kaplan, D.: Demonstratives. In: Almog, J., Perry, J., Wettstein, H. (eds.) Themes from Kaplan. Oxford University Press (1989)
Kratzer, A.: The notional category of modality. In: Words, Worlds, and Context. de Gruyter (1981)
Kratzer, A., Shimoyama, J.: Indeterminate pronouns: The view from japanese. In: Proceedings of the Third Tokyo Conference on Psycholinguistics (2002)
Lassiter, D.: Nouwen’s puzzle and a scalar semantics for obligations, needs, and desires. In: Proceedings of SALT 21, pp. 694–711 (2011)
Lewis, D.: Counterfactuals. Blackwell, Oxford (1973)
von Neumann, J., Morgenstern, O.: Theory of Games and Economic Behavior. Princeton University Press (1944)
Perry, J., Israel, D.: Where monsters dwell. Logic, Language and Computation 1, 303–316 (1996)
Portner, P.: Permission and choice. Georgetown University (2010) (manuscript)
Roelofsen, F.: Algebraic foundations for the semantic treatment of inquisitive content. Synthese 190(1), 79–102 (2013)
Ross, A.: Imperatives and logic. Theoria 7(1), 53–71 (1941)
Weatherson, B.: Indicative and subjunctive conditionals. The Philosophical Quarterly 51(203), 200–216 (2001)
Wedgwood, R.: The meaning of “ought”. Oxford Studies in Metaethics 1, 12–60 (2006)
von Wright, G.H.: An Essay on Deontic Logic and the General Theory of Action. North Holland, Amsterdam (1969)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this paper
Cite this paper
Fusco, M. (2014). Factoring Disjunction Out of Deontic Modal Puzzles. In: Cariani, F., Grossi, D., Meheus, J., Parent, X. (eds) Deontic Logic and Normative Systems. DEON 2014. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 8554. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-08615-6_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-08615-6_8
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-08614-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-08615-6
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)