On the Logical Foundations of Moral Agency

  • Emiliano Lorini
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7393)


The aim of this work is to provide a logical analysis of moral agency. Although this concept has been extensively studied in social philosophy and in social sciences, it has been far less studied in the field of deontic logic and multi-agent systems (MASs). We discuss different aspects of moral agency such as the distinction between desires and moral values and the concept of moral agent. All these concepts are formalized in a variant of STIT logic with explicit actions.


Joint Action Moral Agency Atomic Formula Moral Emotion Deontic Logic 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Alger, I., Weibull, J.W.: Homo moralis: preference evolution under incomplete information and assortative matching. Technical report, Toulouse School of Economics, TSE (2012)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Aumann, R.J., Dreze, J.H.: Rational expectations in games. American Economic Review 98(1), 72–86 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Battigalli, P., Dufwenberg, M.: Guilt in games. The American Economic Review 97(2), 170–176 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Belnap, N., Perloff, M., Xu, M.: Facing the future: agents and choices in our indeterminist world. Oxford University Press, New York (2001)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Broersen, J.: A Logical Analysis of the Interaction between ‘Obligation-to-do’ and ‘Knowingly Doing’. In: van der Meyden, R., van der Torre, L. (eds.) DEON 2008. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 5076, pp. 140–154. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Broersen, J., Dastani, M., Hulstijn, J., van der Torre, L.: Goal generation in the BOID architecture. Cognitive Science Quarterly 2(3-4), 428–447 (2002)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cohen, P.R., Levesque, H.J.: Intention is choice with commitment. Artificial Intelligence 42, 213–261 (1990)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fehr, E., Schmidt, K.M.: Theories of fairness and reciprocity: Evidence and economic applications. In: Advances in Economics and Econometrics. Cambridge University Press (2003)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gintis, H., Bowles, S., Boyd, R., Fehr, E. (eds.): Moral sentiments and material interests. MIT Press, Cambridge (2005)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Governatori, G., Rotolo, A.: BIO logical agents: Norms, beliefs, intentions in defeasible logic. Journal of Autonomous Agents and Multi Agent Systems 17(1), 36–69 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Haidt, J.: The moral emotions. In: Davidson, R.J., Scherer, K.R., Goldsmith, H.H. (eds.) Handbook of Affective Sciences, pp. 852–870. Oxford University Press (2003)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Harsanyi, J.: Morality and the theory of rational behaviour. In: Sen, A.K., Williams, B. (eds.) Utilitarianism and Beyond. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1982)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Herzig, A., Lorini, E.: A dynamic logic of agency I: STIT, abilities and powers. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 19(1), 89–121 (2010)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Horty, J.F.: Agency and Deontic Logic. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2001)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lewis, D.: Counterfactuals. Harvard University Press (1973)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Liu, F.: Changing for the better: Preference dynamics and agent diversity. PhD thesis, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands (2008)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Reiter, R.: Knowledge in action: logical foundations for specifying and implementing dynamical systems. MIT Press, Cambridge (2001)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Roy, O.: Epistemic logic and the foundations of decision and game theory. Journal of the Indian Council of Philosophical Research 27(2), 283–314 (2010)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Searle, J.: Rationality in Action. MIT Press, Cambridge (2001)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Sen, A.K.: Rational fools: a critique of the behavioral foundations of economic theory. Philosophy and Public Affairs 6, 317–344 (1977)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Thomason, R.: Combinations of tense and modality. In: Gabbay, D., Guenthner, F. (eds.) Handbook of Philosophical Logic. Reidel, Dordrecht (1984)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    van Benthem, J., Girard, P., Roy, O.: Everything else being equal: a modal logic for ceteris paribus preferences. Journal of Philosophical Logic 38(1), 83–125 (2009)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Zanardo, A.: Branching-time logic with quantification over branches: The point of view of modal logic. Journal of Symbolic Logic 61(1), 143–166 (1996)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Emiliano Lorini
    • 1
  1. 1.Université de Toulouse, IRIT-CNRSFrance

Personalised recommendations