On States, Actions, Omissions and Norms

  • Risto Hilpinen
Part of the Synthese Library book series (SYLI, volume 266)


Philosophers, lawyers and detectives have been puzzled by the problem of locating actions in time and space. The great detective Nero Wolfe observed (Stout 1935/1982, 16): The average murder, I would guess, consumes ten or fifteen seconds at the outside. In cases of slow poison and similar ingenuities death of course is lingering, but the act of murder is commonly quite brief.


Agent Causation Modal Logic Deontic Logic Action Description Action Possibility 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Apostel, Leo (1982), “Towards a General Theory of Argumentation” in E.M. Barth and J.L. Martens (eds.), Argumentation. Approaches to Theory Formation. Amsterdam, John Benjamins B.V., pp. 93–122.Google Scholar
  2. Åqvist, Lennart (1974), “A New Approach to the Logical Theory of Actions and Causality” in S. Stenlund (ed.), Logical Theory and Semantic Analysis. Dordrecht, D. Reidel, pp. 73–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Åqvist, Lennart and Philip Mullock (1989), Causing Harm. Berlin-New York, Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  4. Bäck, Allan (1996), On Reduplication. Logical Theories of Qualification. Leiden-New York-Köln, E.J. Brill.Google Scholar
  5. Belnap, Nuel (1991), “Backwards and Forwards in the Modal Logic of Agency,” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 51, 777–807.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Belnap, Nuel and Michael Perloff (1990), “Seeing to It That: A Canonical Form for Agentives” in H. Kyburg etal. (eds.), Knowledge Representation and Defeasible Reasoning. Dordrecht- Boston, Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 167–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Belnap, Nuel and Michael Perloff (1992), “The Way of the Agent,” Studia logica 51, 463–484.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Buck, Brigitte (1987), Eine deontische Logik auf der Grundlage dynamischer Aussagenlogik. Dissertation, Universität zu Kiel, Kiel.Google Scholar
  9. Carmo, José and Andrew Jones (1993), “Deontic Database Constraints and the Characterisation of Recovery” in A.I.J. Jones and M. Sergot (eds.), AEON 94. Workshop Proceedings: Second International Workshop on Deontic Logic in Computer Science. Oslo, Tano A.S., pp. 56–85.Google Scholar
  10. Castaneda, Hector-Neri (1981), “The Paradoxes of Deontic Logic. The Simplest Solution to All of Them in One Fell Swoop” in R. Hilpinen (ed.), New Studies in Deontic Logic. Norms, Actions and the Foundations of Ethics. Dordrecht, D. Reidel, pp. 37–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Castaneda, Hector-Neri (1985), “Aspectual Actions and Davidson’s Theory of Events” in E. LePore and B.P. McLaughlin (eds.), Actions and Events: Perspectives on the Philosophy of D. Davidson. Oxford, Basil Blackwell, pp. 294–310.Google Scholar
  12. Chellas, Brian (1969), The Logical Form of Imperatives (Dissertation, Stanford University). Stanford, Perry Lane Press.Google Scholar
  13. Chellas, Brian (1992), “Time and Modality in the Logic of Agency,” Studia Logica 51, 485 – 517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Cook, Walter Wheeler (1942), The Logical and Legal Bases of the Conflict of Laws. Cambridge, Mass., Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Czelakowski, Janusz (1997), “Action and Deontology” in Sten Lindström and Eva Ejerhed (eds.), Logic, Action and Cognition. Dordrecht and Boston, Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  16. Davidson, Donald (1980), “Agency” in D. Davidson, Essays in Actions and Events. Oxford, Clarendon Press, pp. 43–61.Google Scholar
  17. Eells, Ellery (1991), Probabilistic Causality. Cambridge and New York, Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fine, Kit (1982), “Acts, Events and Things” in Werner Leinfellner et al. (eds.), Language and Ontology: Proceedings of the Sixth International Wittgenstein Symposium. Wien, Hölder- Pichler-Tempsky, pp. 97–105.Google Scholar
  19. Hamblin, C.L. (1987), Imperatives. Oxford, Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  20. Hart, Herbert L.A. and A.M. Honoré (1959), Causation in the Law. Oxford, Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  21. Hilpinen, Risto (1981), “Conditionals and Possible Worlds” in G. Fløistad (ed.), Contemporary Philosophy: A New Survey. The Hague-Boston-London, Martinus Nijhoff, pp. 299–335.Google Scholar
  22. Hilpinen, Risto (1993a), “On Deontic Logic, Pragmatics, and Modality” in Herbert Stachowiak (ed.), Pragmatik: Handbuch Pragmatischen Denkens. Band IV: Sprachphilosophie, Sprachpragmatik und formative Pragmatik. Hamburg, Felix Meiner Verlag, pp. 295–319.Google Scholar
  23. Hilpinen, Risto (1993b), “Actions in Deontic Logic” in J.-J. Ch. Meyer and R.J. Wieringa (eds.), Deontic Logic in Computer Science: Normative System Specification. Chichester-New York, John Wiley & Sons, pp. 85–100.Google Scholar
  24. Hilpinen, Risto (1997a), “On Impersonal Ought-Statements and Personal Directives” in E.G. Valdes et al. (eds.), Normative Systems in Legal and Moral Theory. Festschrift for Carlos E. Alchourrón and Eugenio Bulygin. Berlin, Duncker & Humblot.Google Scholar
  25. Hilpinen, Risto (1997b), “On Action and Agency” in Sten Lindström and Eva Ejerhed (eds.), Logic, Action and Cognition. Dordrecht and Boston, Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  26. Holmström-Hintikka, Ghita (1991), Action, Purpose and Will. A Formal Theory. Acta Philosophica Fennica 50, Helsinki, Societas Philosophica Fennica.Google Scholar
  27. Horty, John and Nuel Belnap (1995), “The Deliberative Stit: A Study of Action, Omission, Ability, and Obligation,” The Journal of Philosophical Logic 24, 583–644.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hruschka, Joachim (1986), “Das deontologische Sechseck bei Gottfried Achenwall im Jahre 1767,” Berichte aus der Sitzungen der Joachim Jungius Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften e. V. 4 (2), Hamburg.Google Scholar
  29. Jones, Andrew I.J. and Ingmar Pörn (1985), “Ideality, Sub-Ideality and Deontic Logic,” Synthese 65,275–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kanger, Stig (1972), “Law and Logic,” Theoria 38, 105–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lewis, David (1973), Counter)actuals. Oxford, Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  32. Lindahl, Lars (1977), Position and Change. Dordrecht and Boston, D. Reidel Publishing Company.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Lucas, J.R. (1993), Responsibility. Oxford, Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  34. Mellor, D.H. (1995), The Facts of Causation. London and New York, Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Perloff, Michael (1991), “Stit and the Language of Agency,” Synthese 86, 379–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Pörn, Ingmar (1974), “Some Basic Concepts of Action” in Sören Stenlund (ed.), Logical Theory and Semantic Analysis. Dordrecht, D. Reidel, pp. 93–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Pörn, Ingmar (1977), Action Theory and Social Science. Dordrecht, D. Reidel.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Rachels, James (1975), “Active and Passive Euthanasia,” The New England Journal of Medicine 292,78–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Salmon, Wesley C. (1989), “Four Decades of Scientific Explanation” in Philip Kitcher and Wesley C. Salmon (eds.), Scientific Explanation. (Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, Vol. XIII), Minneapolis, University of Minnesota Press, pp. 3–219.Google Scholar
  40. Sandu, Gabriel and Raimo Tuomela (1996), “Joint Action and Group Action Made Precise,” Synthese 105, 319–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Segerberg, Krister (1980), “Applying Modal Logic,” Studia Logica 39, 275–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Segerberg, Krister (1985) “Routines,” Synthese 65, 185–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Segerberg, Krister (1989), “Bringing It About,” Journal of Philosophical Logic 18, 327–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Segerberg, Krister (1992a), “Getting Started: Beginnings in the Logic of Action,” Studia Logica 51, 347–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Segerberg, Krister (1992b), “Action Incompleteness,” Studia Logica 51, 533–550.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Stout, Rex (1935/1980), The League of Frightened Men. New York, Bantam Books. (First published in 1935.)Google Scholar
  47. Thalberg, Irving (1977), Perception, Emotion and Action: A Component Approach. Oxford, Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  48. Thomson, Judith Jarvis (1971), “The Time of a Killing,” The Journal of Philosophy 68, 115–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Thomson, Judith Jarvis (1977), Acts and Other Events. Ithaca, Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  50. Thomson, Judith Jarvis (1985/1986), “The Trolley Problem” in J.J. Thomson, Rights, Restitution, and Risk: Essays in Moral Theory. Cambridge, Mass., Harvard University Press, 1986, pp. 94–116. Reprinted from The Yale Law Journal 94, 1985.Google Scholar
  51. Weinberger, Ota (1985), “Freedom, Range for Action and the Ontology of Norms,” Synthese 65, 307–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. von Wright, Georg Henrik (1951), “Deontic Logic,” Mind 60, 1–15. Reprinted in G.H. von Wright, Logical Studies. London, Routledge and Kegal Paul, pp. 58–74.Google Scholar
  53. von Wright, Georg Henrik (1963), Norm and Action. London, Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  54. von Wright, Georg Henrik (1968), An Essay in Deontic Logic and the General Theory of Action. Acta Philosophica Fennica 21, Amsterdam, North-Holland Publ. Co.Google Scholar
  55. von Wright, Georg Henrik (1983), “Norms, Truth, and Logic” in G.H. von Wright, Practical Reason: Philosophical Papers, Vol. 1, Ithaca: Cornell University Press, pp. 130–209.Google Scholar
  56. von Wright, Georg Henrik (1996), “Ought-to-be — Ought-to-do,” in G.H. von Wright, Six Essays in Philosophical Logic. Acta Philosophica Fennica 60, Helsinki, Societas Philosophica Fennica, pp. 63–70.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • Risto Hilpinen
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.University of TurkuFinland
  2. 2.University of MiamiUSA

Personalised recommendations