Detecting Deontic Conflicts in Dynamic Settings

Non-monotonic reasoning with normative conflicts in multi-agent deontic logic

We present proof-theoretical and semantical characterizations of two multi-agent deontic logics for dealing with normative conflicts. The resulting logics PMDL and PMDL are non-standard in at least two respects. First, they are nonclassical in the sense that they invalidate some inferences of the propositional fragment of Classical Logic (CL). Consequently, they also invalidate certain inferenc...

ASSESSING DEONTIC TRADE - OFFS : A CONJOINT ANALYSIS APPROACH Working Paper June , 2009 Ronald

Deontic conflicts are situations where you are “damned if you do and damned if you don’t” – where each of the available options will lead to an undersirable outcome or violation. How do people reason about deontic conflicts? In this paper we use the experimental technique of conjoint analysis to uncover the relevant decision factors that people use in such situations. Applications are to progra...

Assessing Deontic Trade-offs: A Conjoint Analysis Approach

Deontic conflicts are situations where you are “damned if you do and damned if you don’t” – where each of the available options will lead to an undesirable outcome or violation. How do people reason about deontic conflicts? In this paper we use the experimental technique of conjoint analysis to uncover the relevant decision factors that people use in such situations. Applications are to program...

Normative Conflicts and Deontic Logic

Conflicting Imperatives and Dyadic Deontic Logic

Often a set of imperatives or norms seems satisfiable from the outset, but conflicts arise when ways to fulfill all are ruled out by unfortunate circumstances. Semantic methods to handle normative conflicts were devised by B. van Fraassen and J. F. Horty, but these are not sensitive to circumstances. The present paper extends these resolution mechanisms to circumstantial inputs, defines dyadic ...