Deontic Reasoning Across Contexts
نویسنده
چکیده
Contrastivism about ‘ought’ holds that ‘ought’ claims are relativized, at least implicitly, to sets of mutually exclusive but not necessarily jointly exhaustive alternatives. This kind of theory can solve puzzles that face other linguistic theories of ‘ought’, via the rejection or severe restriction of principles that let us make inferences between ‘ought’ claims. By rejecting or restricting these principles, however, the contrastivist takes on a burden of recapturing acceptable inferences that these principles let us make. This paper investigates the extent to which a contrastivist can do this.
منابع مشابه
Alexander Staller Perspective Effects 1 Running Head: Non-deontic Perspective Effects Perspective Effects in Non-deontic Versions of the Wason Selection Task Perspective Effects in Non-deontic Versions of the Wason Selection Task an Example-based Account of Perspective Effects
Perspective Effects 2 Abstract Perspective effects in the Wason four-card selection task occur when people choose mutually exclusive sets of cards depending on the perspective they adopt when making their choice. Previous demonstrations of perspective effects have been limited to deontic contexts; i.e., problem contexts that involve social duty, like permissions and obligations. In three experi...
متن کاملViolation Contexts and Deontic Independence
In this paper we discuss the role of context and independence in normative reasoning. First, deontic operators { obligations, prohibitions , permissions { referring to the ideal context may connict with operators referring to a violation (or contrary-to-duty) context. Second, deontic independence is a powerful concept to derive deontic operators from such operators of other violation contexts. ...
متن کاملA Note for Discussion: Treating Disjunctive Obligation and Conjunctive Action in Event Semantics with Disquotation
Standard deontic logics are about what obtains in deontically ideal worlds. Deontic reasoning from the perspective of event semantics and the disquotation (ESD) theory, which we describe briefly, is about individual obligations, permissions, etc. in this, admittedly non-ideal world. Standard deontic logics are beset with a number of puzzling paradoxes and anomalies. Our suggestion here is that ...
متن کاملContextual Deontic Cognitive Event Calculi for Ethically Correct Robots
However, as McNamara (2010) points out, it’s long been known that in light of “Kant’s Law” we then immediately face a contradiction, for in KTd, ` Oφ → ♦φ. This conditional is known as ‘Kant’s Law,’ and we call the reasoning involving it and Jones the ‘Kant’s-Law Paradox’ (K-LP). In light of this paradox, a machine or robot intended to operate as a morally competent banker overseeing Jones and ...
متن کاملContextual Deontic Logic Violation Contexts and Factual Defeasibility
In this article we introduce Contextual Deontic Logic (Cdl) to analyze the relation between deontic, contextual and defeasible reasoning. The optimal state, and therefore the set of active obligations, can change radically when the violation context changes. In such cases we say that the obligations only in force in the previous violation context are defeated; contextual deontic logic is theref...
متن کاملPerspective effects in nondeontic versions of the Wason selection task.
Perspective effects in the Wason four-card selection task occur when people choose mutually exclusive sets of cards depending on the perspective they adopt when making their choice. Previous demonstrations of perspective effects have been limited to deontic contexts--that is, problem contexts that involve social duty, like permissions and obligations. In three experiments, we demonstrate perspe...
متن کامل