Relative necessity
- 1 June 1963
- journal article
- Published by Cambridge University Press (CUP) in The Journal of Symbolic Logic
- Vol. 28 (2), 113-134
- https://doi.org/10.2307/2271593
Abstract
This paper was suggested by some work of Alan Ross Anderson on deontic logic. Anderson proposed in [1] that the various deontic modalities (‘it is obligatory that’, ‘it is forbidden that’, ‘it is permitted that’, etc.) should be defined in terms of the ordinary alethic modalities (‘it is necessary that’, ‘it is possible that’, etc.). The definition I shall consider is not in fact Anderson's own, though it is closely related to it. His definition, as set out in [1], involves the idea of an (unspecified) penalty or sanction. A forbidden action is defined as one whose commission entails the application of the sanction; an obligatory action is one whose omission entails the application of the sanction.Keywords
This publication has 14 references indexed in Scilit:
- On Ł ukasiewicz's ${\rm \L}$-modal system.Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic, 1961
- I.—ESCAPISM: THE LOGICAL BASIS OF ETHICSMind, 1960
- Logicians at play; or Syll, Simp and HilbertAustralasian Journal of Philosophy, 1956
- On the definition of ‘formal deduction’The Journal of Symbolic Logic, 1956
- A System of Modal LogicPublished by Philosophy Documentation Center ,1953
- ON A SO-CALLED PARADOXMind, 1953
- The deduction theorem in a functional calculus of first order based on strict implicationThe Journal of Symbolic Logic, 1946
- IV.—INDEPENDENT POSTULATES RELATED TO C. I. LEWIS'S THEORY OF STRICT IMPLICATION1Mind, 1934
- Symbolic Logic. By C.I. Lewis and C.H. Langford. Pp. xi 506. 21s. 1932. (The Century Company, New York and London)The Mathematical Gazette, 1934
- Ein erweiterter KlassenkalkülMonatshefte für Mathematik, 1933