Tolerating Inconsistencies: A Study of Logic of Moral Conflicts

Meha Mishra; A.V. Ravishankar Sarma

doi:10.18778/0138-0680.2022.06

Authors

Meha Mishra Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur, Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, 208016, Kalyanpur, Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh, India
A.V. Ravishankar Sarma Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur, Department of Humanities and Social Sciences, 208016, Kalyanpur, Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh, India

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18778/0138-0680.2022.06

Keywords:

moral conflicts, deontic logic, paraconsistent logic, Arjuna's dilemma, paraconsistent deontic logic, context-sensitive deontic logic

Abstract

Moral conflicts are the situations which emerge as a response to deal with conflicting obligations or duties. An interesting case arises when an agent thinks that two obligations A and B are equally important, but yet fails to choose one obligation over the other. Despite the fact that the systematic study and the resolution of moral conflicts finds prominence in our linguistic discourse, standard deontic logic when used to represent moral conflicts, implies the impossibility of moral conflicts. This presents a conundrum for appropriate logic to address these moral conflicts. We frequently believe that there is a close connection between tolerating inconsistencies and conflicting moral obligations. In paraconsistent logics, we tolerate inconsistencies by treating them to be both true and false. In this paper, we analyze Graham Priest’s paraconsistent logic LP, and extend our examination to the deontic extension of LP known as DLP. We illustrate our work, with a classic example from the famous Indian epic Mahabharata, where the protagonist Arjuna faces a moral conflict in the battlefield of Kurukshetra. The paper aims to avoid deontic explosion and allows to accommodate Arjuna’s moral conflict in paraconsistent deontic logics. Our analysis is expected to provide novel tools towards the logical representation of moral conflicts and to shed some light on the context-sensitive paraconsistent deontic logic.

References

A. I. Arruda, A survey of Paraconsistent Logic, [in:] Studies in Logic and the Foundations of Mathematics, vol. 99, Elsevier (1980), pp. 1–41, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0049-237X(09)70477-X.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0049-237X(09)70477-X

A. Avron, Natural 3-valued logics–characterization and proof theory, The Journal of Symbolic Logic, vol. 56(1) (1991), pp. 276–294, DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2274919.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2274919

D. Batens, K. De Clercq, A rich paraconsistent extension of full positive logic, Logique et Analyse, (2004), pp. 227–257.
Google Scholar

M. Beirlaen, C. Straßer, J. Meheus, An inconsistency-adaptive deontic logic for normative conflicts, Journal of Philosophical Logic, vol. 42(2) (2013), pp. 285–315, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10992-011-9221-3.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10992-011-9221-3

D. O. Brink, Moral conflict and its structure, The Philosophical Review, vol. 103(2) (1994), pp. 215–247, DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2185737.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2185737

J. Brockington, Review: (dagger)Matilal Bimal Krishna (ed.): Moral dilemmas in the Mahābhārata. xiv, 156 pp. Simla: Indian Institute of Advanced Study; Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1989. Rs. 95., Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, vol. 55(1) (1992), pp. 147–148, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0041977X00002974.
Google Scholar

N. C. Da Costa, W. A. Carnielli, On paraconsistent deontic logic, Philosophia, vol. 16(3) (1986), pp. 293–305, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02379748.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02379748

J. De Haan, The definition of moral dilemmas: A logical problem, Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, vol. 4(3) (2001), pp. 267–284, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011895415846.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011895415846

D. Glavaničová, M. Pascucci, A Realistic View on Normative Conflicts, Logic and Logical Philosophy, vol. 29(3) (2020), pp. 447–462, DOI: https://doi.org/10.12775/LLP.2020.001.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.12775/LLP.2020.001

L. Goble, Normative conflicts and the logic of ‘ought’, Noûs, vol. 43(3) (2009), pp. 450–489, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0068.2009.00714.x.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0068.2009.00714.x

L. Goble, Prima facie norms, normative conflicts, and dilemmas, [in:] D. M. Gabbay, J. Horty, X. Parent, R. van der Meyden, L. van der Torre (eds.), Handbook of deontic logic and normative systems, vol. 1, College Publications, London (2013), pp. 241–352.
Google Scholar

R. Hilpinen, Deontic logic, [in:] L. Goble (ed.), The Blackwell guide to philosophical logic, vol. 4, Blackwell Oxford, Oxford (2001), pp. 159–182.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/b.9780631206934.2001.00011.x

R. Hilpinen (ed.), Deontic logic: Introductory and systematic readings, vol. 33 of Synthese Library, Springer Science & Business Media, Dordrecht (2012), DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-3146-2.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-3146-2

J. F. Horty, Reasoning with moral conflicts, Noûs, vol. 37(4) (2003), pp. 557–605, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1468-0068.2003.00452.x.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1468-0068.2003.00452.x

T. Jarmużek, M. Klonowski, On logic of strictly-deontic modalities. A semantic and tableau approach, Logic and Logical Philosophy, vol. 29(3) (2020), pp. 335–380, DOI: https://doi.org/10.12775/LLP.2020.010.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.12775/LLP.2020.010

T. Jarmużek, M. Klonowski, Some intensional logics defined by relating semantics and tableau systems, [in:] A. Giordani, J. Malinowski (eds.), Logic in High Definition, vol. 56 of Trends in Logic, Springer (2021), pp. 31–48, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-53487-5_3.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-53487-5_3

S. Jaśkowski, On the discussive conjunction in the propositional calculus for inconsistent deductive systems, Logic and Logical Philosophy, vol. 7(7) (1999), pp. 57–59, DOI: https://doi.org/10.12775/LLP.1999.004.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.12775/LLP.1999.004

S. Jaśkowski, A propositional calculus for inconsistent deductive systems, Logic and logical philosophy, vol. 7(7) (1999), pp. 35–56.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.12775/LLP.1999.003

P. Kulicki, R. Trypuz, Multivalued Logics for Conflicting Norms, [in:] O. Roy, A. Tamminga, M. Willer (eds.), DEON 2016 (2016), pp. 123–138.
Google Scholar

B. K. Matilal, The collected essays of Bimal Krishna Matilal: Ethics and epics, Oxford University Press, Oxford (2002).
Google Scholar

T. McConnell, Moral Dilemmas, [in:] E. N. Zalta (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, fall 2018 ed., Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University (2018), URL: https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2018/entries/moral-dilemmas/.
Google Scholar

C. A. Middelburg, A survey of paraconsistent logics (2011), arXiv:1103.4324.
Google Scholar

G. Priest, The logic of paradox, Journal of Philosophical Logic, vol. 8(1) (1979), pp. 219–241, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00258428.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00258428

G. Priest, Paraconsistent logic, [in:] D. M. Gabbay, F. Guenthner (eds.), Handbook of philosophical logic, vol. 6, Springer, Dordrecht (2002), pp. 287–393, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-0460-1_4.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-0460-1_4

G. Priest, Rational dilemmas, Analysis, vol. 62(1) (2002), pp. 11–16, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/analys/62.1.11.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/analys/62.1.11

S. Radhakrishnan, The Bhagavadgita (17 th Impression) (1963).
Google Scholar

S. Radhakrishnan, C. A. Moore, A source book in Indian philosophy, Princeton University Press, Princeton (2014), URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt7zvjb9.
Google Scholar

G. H. Von Wright, Problems and Prospects of Deontic Logic a Survey, [in:] E. Agazzi (ed.), Modern logic—A survey, Springer, Dordrecht (1981), pp. 399–423, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-9056-2_22.
Google Scholar DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-9056-2_22