Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Contextual Deontic Logic

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Formal Models of Agents (ModelAge 1997)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 1760))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

In this article we propose contextual deontic logic. Contextual obligations are written as O(α | β∖γ), and are to be read as ‘α should be the case if β is the case, unless is the case’. The unless clause is analogous to the justification in Reiter’s default rules. We show how contextual obligations can be used to solve certain aspects of contrary-to-duty paradoxes of dyadic deontic logic.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. C. E. Alchourrón. Philosophical foundations of deontic logic and the logic of defeasible conditionals. In Deontic Logic in Computer Science: Normative System Specification, pages 43–84. John Wiley & Sons, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  2. C. Boutilier. Conditional logics of normality: a modal approach. Artificial Intelligence, 68:87–154, 1994.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  3. C. Boutilier. Toward a logic for qualitative decision theory. In Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning (KR’94), pages 75–86, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Philippe Besnard and Yao-Hua Tan. A modal logic with context-dependent inference for non-monotonic reasoning. In Proceedings of ECAI96, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  5. B.F. Chellas. Conditional obligation. In Logical Theory and Semantical Analysis, pages 23–33. D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht, Holland, 1974.

    Google Scholar 

  6. R.M. Chisholm. Contrary-to-duty imperatives and deontic logic. Analysis, 24:33–36, 1963.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. J.W. Forrester. Gentle murder, or the adverbial Samaritan. Journal of Philosophy, 81:193–197, 1984.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  8. D. Gabbay. Labelled deductive systems. Technical report, Centrum fur Informations und Sprachverarbeitung, Universitat Munchen, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  9. B. Hansson. An analysis of some deontic logics. In Deontic Logic: Introductionary and Systematic Readings, pages 121–147. D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht, Holland, 1971.

    Google Scholar 

  10. R.E. Jennings. A utilitarian semantics for deontic logic. Journal of PHhilisophical Logic, 3:445–465, 1974.

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. A.J.I. Jones and M. Sergot. Deontic logic in the representation of law: Towards a methodology. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 1:45–64, 1992.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. J. Lang. Conditional desires and utilities-an alternative approach to qualitative decision theory. In Proceedings of the ECAI’96, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  13. D. Lewis. Semantic analysis for dyadic deontic logic. In Logical Theory and Semantical Analysis, pages 1–14. D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht, Holland, 1974.

    Google Scholar 

  14. H. Prakken and M.J. Sergot. Contrary-to-duty imperatives, defeasibility and violability. In Proceedings of the Second Workshop on Deontic Logic in Computer Science (Deon’94), Oslo, 1994. To appear in: Studia Logica.

    Google Scholar 

  15. R. Reiter. A logic for default reasoning. Artificial Intelligence, 13:81–132, 1980.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  16. Y.U. Ryu and R.M. Lee. Defeasible deontic reasoning and its applications to normative systems. Technical report, Euridis, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  17. L. Royakkers. Representing Legal Rules in Deontic Logic. PhD thesis, University of Brabant, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  18. T. Smith. Legal Expert Systems: Discussion of Theoretical Assumptions. PhD thesis, University of Utrecht, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  19. J.E. Tomberlin. Contrary-to-duty imperatives and conditional obligation. Noûs, 16:357–375, 1981.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  20. Y.-H. Tan and L.W.N. van der Torre. How to combine ordering and minimizing in a deontic logic based on preferences. In Deontic Logic, Agency and Normative Systems, Proceedings of the third workshop on deontic logic in computer science (ΔEON’96), pages 216–232. Springer Verlag, Workshops in Computer Science, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  21. L.W.N. van der Torre and Y.H. Tan. Cancelling and overshadowing: two types of defeasibility in defeasible deontic logic. In Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI’95), pages 1525–1532. Morgan Kaufman, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  22. L.W.N. van der Torre and Y.H. Tan. The different faces of defeasibility in defeasible deontic logic. In D. Nute, editor, Defeasible Deontic Logic. Kluwer, 1997. To appear.

    Google Scholar 

  23. L.W.N. van der Torre and Y.H. Tan. Prohairetic deontic logic and qualitative decision theory. In Proceedings of AAAI spring symposium, 1997. To appear.

    Google Scholar 

  24. J. van Eck. A system of temporally relative modal and deontic predicate logic and its philosophical applications. Logique et Analyse, 99,100, 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  25. F. Veltman. Defaults in update semantics. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 25:221–261, 1996.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Max-Planck-Institute for Computer Science, Im StadWald, D-66123, Saarbrücken, Germany

    Leendert W. N. van der Torre

  2. Euridis, Erasmus University Rotterdam, P.O. Box 1738, 3000 DR, Rotterdam, The Netherlands

    Yao-Hua Tan

Authors
  1. Leendert W. N. van der Torre
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yao-Hua Tan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Science, Utrecht University, Padualaan 14, De Uithof, 3508 TB, Utrecht, The Netherlands

    John-Jules Ch. Meyer

  2. Institut d’Informatique, Rue Grandgagnage 21, 5000, Namur, Belgium

    Pierre-Yves Schobbens

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1999 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

van der Torre, L.W.N., Tan, YH. (1999). Contextual Deontic Logic. In: Meyer, JJ.C., Schobbens, PY. (eds) Formal Models of Agents. ModelAge 1997. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 1760. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-46581-2_16

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-46581-2_16

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-67027-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-46581-2

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation