Abstract
Obligations can be affected by knowledge. Several approaches exist to formalize knowledge-based obligations, but no formalism has been developed yet to capture the dynamic interaction between knowledge and obligations. We introduce the dynamic extension of an existing logic for knowledge-based obligations here. We motivate the logic by analyzing several scenarios and by showing how it can capture in an original manner several fundamental deontic notions such as absolute, prima facie and all-things-considered obligations. Finally, in the dynamic epistemic logic tradition, we provide reduction axioms for the dynamic operator of the new logic.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
If \(\chi \in \varPhi \) and there is no \(\chi ^\prime \in \varPhi \) such that \(\chi ^\prime \succ \chi \), let \(\varPhi _\chi =\varnothing \) and \(\bigvee \varPhi _\chi =\bot \). If \(\chi =\top \), \(\varPhi _\chi =\varPhi \).
References
Hansson, B.: An analysis of some deontic logics. Nous, 373–398 (1969)
Prakken, H., Sergot, M.: Dyadic deontic logic and contrary-to-duty obligations. In: Nute, D. (eds.) Defeasible Deontic Logic. Synthese Library (Studies in Epistemology, Logic, Methodology, and Philosophy of Science), vol. 263. pp. 223–262. Springer, Dordrecht (1997)https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-8851-5_10
van de Torre, L.: Reasoning about obligations: defeasibility in preference-based deontic logic. Tinbergen Institute Research Series 140. Amsterdam: Thesis (1997)
van Benthem, J., Grossi, D., Liu, F.: Priority structures in deontic logic. Theoria 80(2), 116–152 (2014)
Su, X.: Knowledge-based conditional obligation. Short Papers Adv. Modal Logic AiML 2020, 112–116 (2020)
Pacuit, E., Parikh, R., Cogan, E.: The logic of knowledge based obligation. Synthese 149(2), 311–341 (2006)
Horty, J.: Epistemic oughts in stit semantics. Ergo J. Philos. 6 (2019)
Baltag, A., Smets, S.: Dynamic belief revision over multi-agent plausibility models. In: Proceedings of LOFT, pp. 11–24, University of Liverpool (2006)
Anderson, A.R.: A reduction of deontic logic to alethic modal logic. Mind 67(265), 100–103 (1958)
Kanger, S.: New foundations for ethical theory. In: Hilpinen, R. (ed.) Deontic Logic: Introductory and Systematic Readings. SYLI, vol. 33, pp. 36–58. Springer, Dordrecht (1970). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-3146-2_2
Fagin, R., Moses, Y., Halpern, J.Y., Vardi, M.Y.: Reasoning about Knowledge. MIT Press (2003)
Liu, F.: Changing for the better: Preference dynamics and agent diversity. Ph.D. thesis, University of Amsterdam (2008)
van der Torre, L., Tan, Y.-H.: An update semantics for deontic reasoning. In: Norms, Logics and Information Systems, pp. 73–90 (1998)
van Ditmarsch, H., Kooi, B.: Semantic results for ontic and epistemic change. In: Proceedings LOFT, vol. 7, pp. 87–117, Amsterdam UP (2008)
van Ditmarsch, H., van der Hoek, W., Kooi, B.: Dynamic Epistemic Logic. Springer Science & Business Media (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-5839-4
Kraus, S., Lehmann, D., Magidor, M.: Nonmonotonic reasoning, preferential models and cumulative logics. Artif. Intell. 44, 167–207 (1990)
Governatori, G., Rotolo, A., Sartor, G.: Temporalised normative positions in defeasible logic. Proc. ICAIL 10, 25–34 (2005)
Benthem, J.v., Liu, F.: Dynamic logic of preference upgrade. J. Appl. Non-Class. Log, 17(2), 157–182 (2007)
Greenspan, P.S.: Conditional oughts and hypothetical imperatives. J Philos. 72(10), 259–276 (1975)
Jones, A.J., Pörn, I.: Ideality, sub-ideality and deontic logic. Synthese 65(2), 275–290 (1985)
McCloskey, H.: Ross and the concept of a prima facie duty. Aust. J. Philos. 41(3), 336–345 (1963)
Alchourrón, C.E.: Detachment and defeasibility in deontic logic. Stud. Log. 57(1), 5–18 (1996)
Meyer, J.-J.C.: A different approach to deontic logic: deontic logic viewed as a variant of dynamic logic. Notre Dame J. Formal Log. 29, 109–136 (1988)
De Lima, T., Royakkers, L., Dignum, F.: A logic for reasoning about responsibility. Logic J. IGPL 18(1), 99–117 (2010)
Kooi, B.: Expressivity and completeness for public update logics via reduction axioms. J. Appl. Non-Class. Logics 17(2), 231–253 (2007)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Grossi, D., Kooi, B., Su, X., Verbrugge, R. (2021). How Knowledge Triggers Obligation. In: Ghosh, S., Icard, T. (eds) Logic, Rationality, and Interaction. LORI 2021. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 13039. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-88708-7_17
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-88708-7_17
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-88707-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-88708-7
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)
