PDC Homepage

Home » Products » Purchase

The Journal of Philosophy

Volume 113, Issue 8, August 2016

Fabrizio Cariani
Pages 396-416
DOI: 10.5840/jphil2016113826

Consequence and Contrast in Deontic Semantics

Contrastivists view ought-sentences as expressing comparisons among alternatives. Deontic actualists believe that the value of each alternative in such a comparison is determined by what would actually happen if that alternative were to be the case. One of the arguments that motivates actualism is a challenge to the principle of agglomeration over conjunction—the principle according to which if you ought to run and you ought to jump, then you ought to run and jump. I argue that there is no way of developing the actualist insight into a logic that invalidates the agglomeration principle without also invalidating other desirable patterns of inference. After doing this, I extend the analysis to other contrastive views that challenge agglomeration in the way that the actualist does. This motivates skepticism about the actualist’s way of challenging agglomeration.

Document is being loaded ...
Not yet a subscriber? Subscribe here
Already a subscriber? Login here

This document may be purchased

Purchase this article for
$20.00 USD
Enter your confirmation number if you've already purchased this article.