Abstract
In this paper, we present an adaptive logic for deontic conflicts, called P2.1 r, that is based on Goble’s logic SDL a P e—a bimodal extension of Goble’s logic P that invalidates aggregation for all prima facie obligations. The logic P2.1 r has several advantages with respect to SDL a P e. For consistent sets of obligations it yields the same results as Standard Deontic Logic and for inconsistent sets of obligations, it validates aggregation “as much as possible”. It thus leads to a richer consequence set than SDL a P e. The logic P2.1 r avoids Goble’s criticisms against other non-adjunctive systems of deontic logic. Moreover, it can handle all the ‘toy examples’ from the literature as well as more complex ones.
Research for this paper was supported by subventions from Ghent University and from the Research Foundation – Flanders (FWO - Vlaanderen). The authors are indebted to the three anonymous referees for valuable comments and suggestions.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Van Fraassen, B.: Values and the heart’s command. Journal of Philosophy 70, 5–19 (1973)
Goble, L.: Multiplex semantics for deontic logic. Nordic Journal of Philosophical Logic 5, 113–134 (2000)
Goble, L.: Preference semantics for deontic logic. Part I: Simple models. Logique et Analyse 183–184, 383–418 (2003)
Goble, L.: Preference semantics for deontic logic. Part II: Multiplex models. Logique et Analyse 185–188, 335–363 (2004)
Schotch, P.K., Jennings, R.E.: Non-kripkean deontic logic. In: Hilpinen, R. (ed.) New Studies in Deontic logic, pp. 149–162. Reidel, Dordrecht (1981)
Goble, L.: A logic for deontic dilemmas. Journal of Applied Logic 3, 461–483 (2005)
Horty, J.F.: Moral dilemmas and nonmonotonic logic. Journal of Philosophical Logic 23, 35–65 (1994)
Batens, D.: Adaptive Logics and Dynamic Proofs. Mastering the Dynamics of Reasoning, with Special Attention to Handling Inconsistency (forthcoming)
Batens, D.: A universal logic approach to adaptive logics. Logica Universalis 1, 221–242 (2007)
da Costa, N.C., Carnielli, W.: On paraconsistent deontic logic. Philosophia 16, 293–305 (1986)
Holbo, J.: Moral dilemmas and the logic of obligation. American Philosophical Quarterly 39, 259–274 (2002)
Routley, R., Plumwood, V.: Moral dilemmas and the logic of deontic notions. In: Priest, G., Routley, R., Norman, J. (eds.) Paraconsistent Logic. Essays on the Inconsistent, pp. 653–702. Philosophia Verlag, München (1989)
McConnell, T.: Moral dilemmas (2006), http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/moral-dilemmas/
Conee, E.: Against moral dilemmas. The Philosophical Review 91, 87–97 (1982)
Hansen, J.: Problems and results for logics about imperatives. Journal of Applied Logic 2, 39–61 (2004)
Horty, J.F.: Reasoning with moral conflicts. Nous 37, 557–605 (2003)
Van der Torre, Leendert Tan, Y.H.: Two-phase deontic logic. Logique et Analyse 43, 411–456 (2000)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2010 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Meheus, J., Beirlaen, M., Van De Putte, F. (2010). Avoiding Deontic Explosion by Contextually Restricting Aggregation. In: Governatori, G., Sartor, G. (eds) Deontic Logic in Computer Science. DEON 2010. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 6181. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-14183-6_12
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-14183-6_12
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-14182-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-14183-6
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)