Moral Conflicts between Groups of Agents

Kooi, Barteld; Tamminga, Allard

doi:10.1007/s10992-007-9049-z

“…Further research includes (i) the relation of the agentive setting applied here with other such settings, e.g. dynamic logic [9,22], stit theory [16,18], and their historical predecessors [23,33,34]; and (ii) the application of the inconsistency-adaptive approach for accommodating normative conflicts within these other frameworks for accounting for action in deontic logic.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Paraconsistent Multi-agent Framework for Dealing with Normative Conflicts

Beirlaen

¹

,

Straßer

²

2011

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. In a multi-agent deontic setting, normative conflicts can take a variety of different logical forms. In this paper, we present a very general characterization of such conflicts, including both intra-and inter-agent normative conflicts, conflicts between groups of agents, conflicts between obligations and permissions, and conflicts between contradictory norms. In order to account for the consistent possibility of this wide variety of conflict-types, we present a paraconsistent deontic logic, i.e. a logic that invalidates the classical principle of non-contradiction. Next, we strengthen this logic within the adaptive logics framework for defeasible reasoning. The resulting inconsistency-adaptive deontic logic interprets a given set of norms 'as consistently as possible'.

show abstract

“…In a way technically analogous to the representation of different authorities via superscripts to the deontic operators, we could add subscripts for distinguishing between various interest groups in view of which the norms hold (cfr. [18]). Moreover, the adaptive framework could be enhanced so as to allow for varying degrees of priority amongst norms and/or conditional norms [29].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For instance, in [18] Kooi & Tamminga add super-and subscripts to the deontic operators in order to express the source and the interest group in view of which a norm holds. However, in their system explosion still ensues when faced with conflicting norms that hold for the same source and interest group.…”

Section: Normative Conflictsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Computational Logic in Multi-Agent Systems

2011

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

2

0

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. In a multi-agent deontic setting, normative conflicts can take a variety of different logical forms. In this paper, we present a very general characterization of such conflicts, including both intra-and inter-agent normative conflicts, conflicts between groups of agents, conflicts between obligations and permissions, and conflicts between contradictory norms. In order to account for the consistent possibility of this wide variety of conflict-types, we present a paraconsistent deontic logic, i.e. a logic that invalidates the classical principle of non-contradiction. Next, we strengthen this logic within the adaptive logics framework for defeasible reasoning. The resulting inconsistency-adaptive deontic logic interprets a given set of norms 'as consistently as possible'.

show abstract

“…Both Makinson and van der Torre's input/output logic and deontic STIT logic [12,13,19] are not free from this paradox.…”

Section: On Ross' Paradoxmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A simpler possible world semantics for group STIT is proposed by Kooi and Tamminga [13]. Here we simplify it for individual STIT.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%