Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Deontic paradoxes: sources and solution
KTH, School of Architecture and the Built Environment (ABE), Philosophy.
(English)Manuscript (preprint) (Other academic)
National Category
Philosophy
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-19417OAI: oai:DiVA.org:kth-19417DiVA: diva2:337537
Note
QC 20100806Available from: 2010-08-06 Created: 2010-08-06 Last updated: 2010-08-06Bibliographically approved
In thesis
1. Goal-Setting and the Logic of Transport Policy Decisions
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Goal-Setting and the Logic of Transport Policy Decisions
2009 (English)Doctoral thesis, comprehensive summary (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

The thesis aims at developing approaches to transport policy decisions, based on suggestions and ideas originating from moral philosophy and philosophical decision theory.Paper I analyzes the Swedish transport policy goals, and the problem of combining policygoals with welfare economics. A problem of circularity arises as the Swedish transport policygoals are conflicting, and hence must be subject to trade-offs, while several of the goals themselves entail statements on how to prioritize or restrain goals in case of conflict.Paper II analyzes rationality in road safety policy. Problematic features are identified and discussed. The paper argues that the Swedish road safety goal is rational, since it is actionguiding and achievement-inducing.Paper III includes a model of rational choice under risk with biased risk perception. Under certain plausible conditions, a regulator should raise the population’s risk exposure. By deteriorating the environment the regulator can motivate drivers to choose behaviour that is less biased.Paper IV provides a formal representation of goal systems. The focus is on three properties:consistency, conflict, and coherence. It is argued that consistency is adequately regarded as a property relative to the decision situation or, more specifically, the set of alternatives that the agent faces. Conflict is adequately regarded as a relation over subsets of a given goal systemand should likewise be regarded as relative to the set of alternative that the agent faces.Coherence is given a probabilistic interpretation, based on a support relation over subsets of goal systems.Paper V investigates problems associated with standard deontic logic. A deontic predicate is derived, which avoids some of the major paradoxes in the area. In particular, paradoxes occurring when one obligation is derived by logical necessity from another obligation are dealt with.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Stockholm: KTH, 2009. vi, 16 p.
Series
Theses in philosophy from the Royal Institute of Technology, ISSN 1650-8831 ; 30
Keyword
goals; transport policy; road safety; coherence; action logic; deontic logic
National Category
Philosophy
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-10080 (URN)978-91-9415-252-4 (ISBN)
Public defence
2009-03-20, F3, Linstedtsvägen 26, Stockholm, 10:00 (English)
Opponent
Supervisors
Note
QC 20100806Available from: 2009-03-12 Created: 2009-03-11 Last updated: 2010-08-06Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Rosencrantz, Holger
By organisation
Philosophy
Philosophy

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

urn-nbn

Altmetric score

urn-nbn
Total: 38 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf