Obligations and Prohibitions in Talmudic Deontic Logic

Abstract

Abstract. 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:In We shall list the types of obligation patterns appearing in the Talmud and compare Talmudic Logic with modern deontic logic.

A Generative Grammar for Modal Syntagms

“…An example of intuitionistic deontic logical framework has been proposed in relation to the Talmud [1]. Furthermore, since each system in modal logics represents a specific textual domain that assigns a specific non-ambiguous meaning: for example, Kripke's structures for temporal logic have been converted into Moore's machines [21].…”

Mīmāṃsā Deontic Logic: Proof Theory and Applications

“…The choice to use classical logic as base system, in contrast to the use of intuitionistic logic in Gabbay et al's deontic logic of the Talmud [1], is due to various metarules by Mīmām . sā authors implying the legitimacy of the reductio ad absurdum argument RAA; these include the following (contained in Jayanta's book Nyāyamañjarī): "When there is a contradiction (ϕ and not ϕ), at the denial of one (alternative), the other is known (to be true)".…”

Uncertainty Rules in Talmudic Reasoning

“…O T C means C is obligatory and F T C means C is forbidden. (For the nature of rules and character of O and F, see Abraham et al 2010. 1 ) A halakhic decision takes the following form. Suppose we moved along the states s 1 , .…”