NORMATIVE CHARACTERISTICS OF ACTIONS IN DYNAMIC DEONTIC LOGIC

被引:1
|
作者
Borisov, Evgeny, V [1 ]
机构
[1] Russian Acad Sci, Siberian Branch, Inst Philosophy & Law, Novosibirsk, Russia
关键词
deontic logic; dynamic propositional logic; normative characteristics of actions; deontic universe; Kislov;
D O I
10.17223/1998863X/64/24
中图分类号
C [社会科学总论];
学科分类号
03 ; 0303 ;
摘要
In a series of recent papers, Kislov introduced a number of new normative characteristics of actions - permissible in the strict sense (in what follows I write 'strictly' instead of 'in the strict sense'), strictly forbidden, strictly obligatory, strictly indifferent, recommending-indifferent, and warning-indifferent. He defined them, in particular, in the context of a deontic version of propositional dynamic logic with a symbol for 'sanction' as the only propositional constant (in what follows, this logic will be referred to as PDL). He also suggested a map of deontic universe representing extensions of the standard and the new normative characteristics of actions. I find his characteristics of actions interesting because they reflect some intuitive normative ideas that are not reflected by standard characteristics. In this paper I examine the semantics of PDL and Kislov's map of deontic universe, and show that both should be corrected in some respects. First, I show that, in order for a PDL model to be deontically relevant, the following restriction on models should be imposed: in each PDL model <W, V>, V(nu) is a nonempty proper subclass of W. Second, I examine Kislov's map of deontic universe and point out three erroneous tenets behind it: 1) There are strictly indifferent actions. 2) Each strictly obligatory action is also strictly permissible (equivalently: each strictly forbidden action is such that not-performing it is strictly permissible). 3) Each (standardly) indifferent action is either warning-indifferent or recommending-indifferent. I conclude that the map of deontic universe should be corrected taking into account the following facts: 1) In models meeting the above restriction, there is no strictly indifferent action. 2) An action can be strictly obligatory without being strictly permissible, and equivalently an action can be strictly forbidden whereas not-performing it is not strictly permissible. 3) An action can be (standardly) indifferent without being warning-indifferent or recommending-indifferent. I also adduce some new examples of using Kislov's characteristics of actions for formalizing intuitive normative ideas.
引用
收藏
页码:253 / 260
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Deontic logic (adapted) for normative conflicts
    Goble, Lou
    LOGIC JOURNAL OF THE IGPL, 2014, 22 (02) : 206 - 235
  • [2] A Deontic Action Logic for Complex Actions
    Dong, Huimin
    Li, Xiaowu
    LOGIC, RATIONALITY, AND INTERACTION (LORI 2013), 2013, 8196 : 311 - 315
  • [3] Connecting Actions and States in Deontic Logic
    Piotr Kulicki
    Robert Trypuz
    Studia Logica, 2017, 105 : 915 - 942
  • [4] Connecting Actions and States in Deontic Logic
    Kulicki, Piotr
    Trypuz, Robert
    STUDIA LOGICA, 2017, 105 (05) : 915 - 942
  • [5] A temporal dynamic deontic logic
    Ju, Fengkui
    van Eijck, Jan
    JOURNAL OF LOGIC AND COMPUTATION, 2019, 29 (02) : 265 - 284
  • [6] Blueprint for a dynamic deontic logic
    Segerberg, Krister
    JOURNAL OF APPLIED LOGIC, 2009, 7 (04) : 388 - 402
  • [7] Contextual Deontic Logic: Normative Agents, Violations and Independence
    Leendert van der Torre
    Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence, 2003, 37 : 33 - 63
  • [8] Contextual deontic logic: normative agents, violations and independence
    van der Torre, L
    ANNALS OF MATHEMATICS AND ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, 2003, 37 (1-2) : 33 - 63
  • [9] Stable Normative Explanations: From Argumentation to Deontic Logic
    Di Florio, Cecilia
    Rotolo, Antonino
    Governatori, Guido
    Sartor, Giovanni
    LOGICS IN ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, JELIA 2023, 2023, 14281 : 123 - 131
  • [10] An Inconsistency-Adaptive Deontic Logic for Normative Conflicts
    Mathieu Beirlaen
    Christian Straßer
    Joke Meheus
    Journal of Philosophical Logic, 2013, 42 : 285 - 315