A deontic logic framework allowing for factual detachment

Straßer, Christian

doi:10.1016/j.jal.2010.11.001

Cited by 25 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…While this paper demonstrated that going adaptive improves CDPM in terms of elegance, strength and intuitiveness, in [15] the author shows that the adaptive logic approach on basis of CDPM is also able to give a solution to another deep problem of dyadic deontic logics, namely the lack of a proper treatment of (defeasible) detachment. The advantages of the logics presented in this paper and in [15] can easily be assembled by forming combined systems in the same manner as was done in Section 6.4. Proof.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 84%

An adaptive logic framework for conditional obligations and deontic dilemmas

Straßer

2010

LLP

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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 weakened rational monotonicity principle to tackle this problem. This solution is suboptimal as it is for some examples counter-intuitive or even leads to explosion. The paper identifies also other problems of Goble's systems. For instance, to make optimal use of the restricted inheritance principle, in many cases the user has to manually add certain statements to the premises.An adaptive logic framework based on CDPM is proposed which is able to tackle these problems. It allows for certain rules to be applied as much as possible. In this way counter-intuitive consequences as well as explosion can be prohibited and no user interference is required. Furthermore, for non-conflicting premise sets the adaptive logics are equivalent to Goble's dyadic version of standard deontic logic.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 84%

An adaptive logic framework for conditional obligations and deontic dilemmas

Straßer

2010

LLP

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It thereby consolidates our earlier work, establishing a firmer foundation for our formal analysis of CTD scenarios. A next step would be to offer systematic comparisons between our theory and the recent works of Christian Straβer 17 [12] and by Dov Gabbay and Karl Schlechta [4][5][6]11] on closely related issues in deontic logic, including ranked preferential structures.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In particular, it would be interesting to explore the possibility (mentioned in[12]) of complementing our framework, turning it into a form of adaptive logic, in order to be able to deal with exceptions and defeasibility, but keeping our treatment of contrary-to-duties. by guest on January 28, 2013 http://logcom.oxfordjournals.org/ Downloaded from…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Completeness and decidability results for a logic of contrary-to-duty conditionals

Carmo

Jones

2012

Journal of Logic and Computation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article has two parts. In Part I, we briefly outline the analysis of 'contrary-to-duty' obligation sentences presented in our 2002 handbook chapter 'Deontic logic and contrary-to-duties', with a focus on the intuitions that motivated the basic formal-logical moves we made. We also explain that the present account of the theory differs in two significant respects from the earlier version, one terminological, the other concerning the way the constituent modalities interconnect. Part II is the principal contribution of this article, in which we show that it is possible to define a complete and decidable axiomatization for the Carmo and Jones logic, a problem that was still open. The axiomatization includes two new inference rules; we illustrate their use in proofs, and show that on the basis of this axiomatization we can recover all the axioms and rules considered in 'Deontic logic and contrary-to-duties', and used there in the analysis of contrary-to-duty conditional scenarios.

show abstract

“…As a consequence, our consequence relations are non-monotonic. Other non-monotonic accounts of normative reasoning are based on default logic [32], Input/Output logic [34], Nute's defeasible logic [37,38], and adaptive logics [8,24,35,46].…”

Section: Discussion and Outlookmentioning

confidence: 99%

Normative reasoning by sequent-based argumentation

Straßer

Arieli

2015

Journal of Logic and Computation

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper we present an argumentative approach to normative reasoning. Special attention is paid to deontic conflicts, contrary-toduty and specificity cases, which are modeled by means of argumentative attacks. For this, we adopt a recently proposed framework for logical argumentation in which arguments are generated by a sequent calculus of a given base logic (see the papers of the second author in CLIMA'2013 and of the two authors in Volume 6 (No. 1) of Argument & Computation), and use standard deontic logic as our base logic. Argumentative attacks are realized by elimination rules that allow to discharge specific sequents. We demonstrate the usefulness of our approach by means of various wellknown benchmark examples, and show that this approach is rich enough to capture a variety of paradigms for handling conflicting norms, such as reasoning with maximally consistent sets, prioritized norms, and deontic formalisms based on I/O logic.

show abstract

A deontic logic framework allowing for factual detachment

Cited by 25 publications

References 26 publications

An adaptive logic framework for conditional obligations and deontic dilemmas

An adaptive logic framework for conditional obligations and deontic dilemmas

Completeness and decidability results for a logic of contrary-to-duty conditionals

Normative reasoning by sequent-based argumentation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About