|
 ABSTRACT
This is a paper on the Chisholm paradox in deontic logic. Three points are raised: the distinction between “violability” and defeasibility, the view that the Chisholm paradox is only a problem for a certain category of obligations, and the choice between factual and deontic detachment in a solution of the paradox.
REFERENCES
Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.
| |
1
|
Ch~llas, Brian F., 1980, Modal Logic, An Introduction, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
|
| |
2
|
Chellas, Brian F., 1974, Conditional Obligation, in: S. Stenlund (ed.), Logi~ Theory and Semantic Analysis, D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordreeht Holland, pp. 23-33.
|
| |
3
|
Chisholm, Roderick M., 1963, Contrary-to-duty Imperatives and Deontic Logic, Analysis 24, 33- 36.
|
| |
4
|
Decew, Judith Wagner, 1981, Conditional Obligation and Countcrfactuals, Journal of Philosophical Logic lO, 55.72.
|
| |
5
|
Eck, J.A. van, 1982, A system of Temporally Relative Modal and Dcontic Predicate Logic and its Philosophical Applications, Logique et Analyse, 99 and 100.
|
 |
6
|
|
| |
7
|
Jones, Andrew $.I., 1990, Deontic Logic and Legal Knowledge Representation, Ratio Iuris, Volume 3 Number 2, pp. 237-244.
|
| |
8
|
Jones, Andrew J.L, 1992, Deontic Conditionals and Default Reasoning, submitted to Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence.
|
| |
9
|
L6wer, Barry and Marvin Belzer, 1983, Dyadic Deontic Detachment, Synthese 54, pp. 295-318.
|
| |
10
|
Meyer, $.-J. Ch., 1988, A Different Approach to Deontic Logic: Deontic Logic Viewed as a Variant of Dynamic Logic, Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic, Volume 29, pp. 109-135.
|
| |
11
|
Soeteman, Arend, 1989, Logic in Law, Remarks on Logic and Rationality in Normative Reasoning, Especially in Law, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht-Boston-London.
|
|
Adobe Acrobat
QuickTime
Windows Media Player
Real Player
Pdf
I.2