Artificial Intelligence and Law

, Volume 20, Issue 2, pp 145–179

Contrary to time conditionals in Talmudic logic

Article

Abstract

We consider conditionals of the form AB where A depends on the future and B on the present and past. We examine models for such conditional arising in Talmudic legal cases. We call such conditionals contrary to time conditionals.

Three main aspects will be investigated:
  1. 1.

    Inverse causality from future to past, where a future condition can influence a legal event in the past (this is a man made causality).

     
  2. 2.

    Comparison with similar features in modern law.

     
  3. 3.

    New types of temporal logics arising from modelling the Talmudic examples.

     
We shall see that we need a new temporal logic,which we call Talmudic temporal logic with linear open advancing future and parallel changing past, based on two parameters for time.

References

  1. Abraham M, Gabbay D, Schild U (2010) Obligations and prohibitions in Talmudic deontic logic. In: Governatori G, Sartor G (eds) DEON 2010, LNAI 6181, pp 166–178Google Scholar
  2. Abraham M, Gabbay D, Schild U (2011a) Talmudic temporal logic. College Publications, London, p 600Google Scholar
  3. Abraham M, Gabbay D, Schild U (2011b) Obligations and prohibitions in Talmudic deontic logic. Expanded journal version of [7]. Artif Intell Law 19:2117–2148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Abraham M, Gabbay DM, Schild U (2012) The handling of loops in Talmudic logic with application to odd and even loops in argumentation. In: Rydeheard D, Vronkov A, Korovina M, (eds) Proceedings of Howard 60, Manchester, pp 1–25Google Scholar
  5. Abraham M, Gabbay D, Schild U Future oriented determination of entitites in Talmudic logic. J AI Law (Submitted)Google Scholar
  6. Broersen J, Herzig A, Troquard N (2006) From coalition logic to STIT. Electr Note Theor Comput Sci 157:23–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Gabbay D (1987) The declarative past and imperative future: executable temporal logic for the interactive systems. In: Proceedings of temporal logic in specification, LNCS 398. Springer, Berlin, pp 409–448Google Scholar
  8. Gabbay DM et al (1994) Temporal logic: mathematical foundations and computational aspects, vol 1. Oxford University Press, OxfordMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. Gabbay DM et al (2000) Temporal logic: mathematical foundations and computational aspects, vol 2. Oxford University Press, OxfordMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. Gabbay DM (2001) Dynamics of practical reasoning: a position paper. In: Segerberg K, Zakhryaschev M, Rijke M, Wansing H (eds) Advances of modal logic, vol 2. CSLI Publications, CUP, Cambridge, pp 197–242Google Scholar
  11. Governatori G, Rotolo A (2010) Changing legal systems: legal abrogations and annulments in defeasible logic. Logic J IGPL 18(1):157–194MathSciNetMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Bar-Ilan UniversityRamat-GanIsrael
  2. 2.King’s CollegeLondonUK
  3. 3.University of LuxembourgLuxembourgLuxembourg

Personalised recommendations