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.

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.