Obligations and Permissions, and Conflicting Norms.

This article engages with the problem faced by deontic logic in dealing with conflicting norms, taking the issue back to the representation of the logical relations between deontic operators in a square of opposition. Reaction to empirical evidence of conflicting obligations has produced a rejection...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Theoria: A Swedish Journal of Philosophy Vol. 91; no. 5; pp. 1 - 12
Autor principal: Halpin, Andrew
Formato: Artículo
Publicado: Wiley-Blackwell Oct2025
Materias:
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=188962687&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: hlh
    uiTerm: 188962687
    longDbName: Humanities International Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        00405825
        HL0
      jtl: Theoria: A Swedish Journal of Philosophy
      issn: 00405825
      maglogo: Y
    pubinfo:
      dt: Oct2025
      vid: 91
      iid: 5
      pid: 480
      pub: Wiley-Blackwell
    artinfo:
      ui:
        188962687
        10.1111/theo.70032
      ppf: 1
      ppct: 11
      formats:
        fmt:
          – @attributes:
              type: T
          – @attributes:
              type: C
          – @attributes:
              type: P
              size: 350KB
      tig:
        atl: Obligations and Permissions, and Conflicting Norms.
      aug:
        au: Halpin, Andrew
        affil: Faculty of Law, National University of Singapore, , Singapore
      su:
        Deontic logic
        Subaltern
        Kramer, Matthew
        Steiner, Hillel
        Political philosophy
      sug:
        subj:
          Deontic logic
          Subaltern
          Kramer, Matthew
          Steiner, Hillel
          Political philosophy
      keyword:
        conflicting norms
        deontic logic
        deontic X structure
        square of opposition
      ab: This article engages with the problem faced by deontic logic in dealing with conflicting norms, taking the issue back to the representation of the logical relations between deontic operators in a square of opposition. Reaction to empirical evidence of conflicting obligations has produced a rejection of the relations depicted in the sides of a square of opposition, while leaving the diagonal contradictories forming a deontic X structure. It is argued, first, that the contradictory relations between obligation and permission are a prerequisite for any deontic logic. Secondly, that the deontic X structure is not plausible without the supporting relations in the sides of the deontic square. Thirdly, that the conundrum of the apparent incompatibility between the contrary and subaltern relations found in the square, and the empirical evidence of conflicting obligations in actual systems of norms, can be resolved by taking deontic logic as applying primarily to individual norms and only as a secondary matter being involved with identifying conflicts between norms. This produces both a more effective approach to deontic logic, capable of dealing with conflicting norms, and also a more modest approach, in acknowledging its inability to prevent or resolve conflict between norms.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Article
      src: R
    language: English
    refInfo:
    copyright:
      @attributes:
        flag: Y
      custom: Copyright of Theoria: A Swedish Journal of Philosophy is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.
      item: Theoria: A Swedish Journal of Philosophy
      holder: Wiley-Blackwell
      dt:
        @attributes:
          year: 2025
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N