Consequences of Reasoning with Conflicting Obligations

Mind 123 (491):753-790 (2014)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
Since at least the 1960s, deontic logicians and ethicists have worried about whether there can be normative systems that allow conflicting obligations. Surprisingly, however, little direct attention has been paid to questions about how we may reason with conflicting obligations. In this paper, I present a problem for making sense of reasoning with conflicting obligations and argue that no deontic logic can solve this problem. I then develop an account of reasoning based on the popular idea in ethics that reasons explain obligations and show that it solves this problem
PhilPapers/Archive ID
NAICOR
Upload history
Archival date: 2015-11-21
View other versions
Added to PP index
2013-07-06

Total views
1,007 ( #3,087 of 51,496 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
95 ( #4,972 of 51,496 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.