Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-vvkck Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-28T06:02:28.061Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

PREFERENCE BASED ON REASONS

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 November 2011

DANIEL OSHERSON  and
SCOTT WEINSTEIN
DANIEL OSHERSON*
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, Princeton University
SCOTT WEINSTEIN*
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy, University of Pennsylvania
*
*DEPARTMENT OF PSYCHOLOGY, PRINCETON UNIVERSITY, PRINCETON NJ 08540 USA. E-mail: osherson@princeton.edu
†DEPARTMENT OF PHILOSOPHY, UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA, PHILADELPHIA PA 19104 USA. E-mail: weinstein@cis.upenn.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We describe a logic of preference in which modal connectives reflect reasons to desire that a sentence be true. Various conditions on models are introduced and analyzed.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Review of Symbolic Logic , Volume 5 , Issue 1 , March 2012 , pp. 122 - 147
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Symbolic Logic 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Andréka, H., Ryan, M., & Schobbens, P.-Y. (2002). Operators and laws for combining preferential relations. Journal of Logic and Computation, 12, 12–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blackburn, P., de Rijke, M., & Venema, Y. (2001). Modal Logic. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Dietrich, F., & List, C. (2009). A Reason-Based Theory of Rational Choice. Technical Report, London School of Economics.Google Scholar
Gärdenfors, P. (1988). Knowledge in Flux: Modeling the Dynamics of Epistemic States. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Haidt, J. (2001). The emotional dog and its rational tail: A social intuitionist approach to moral judgment. Psychological Review, 108, 814–834.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Johnson, P. E. (1988). Social Choice: Theory and Research. New York, NY: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Keeney, R. L., & Raiffa, H. (1993). Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Trade-Offs. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lang, J., van der Torre, L., & Weydert, E. (2003). Hidden uncertainty in the logical representation of desires. In Proceedings of Eighteenth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI’03). San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.Google Scholar
Levi, I. (1986). Hard Choices: Decision Making under Unresolved Conflict. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, D. (1973). Counterfactuals. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Liu, F. (2008). Changing for the better: Preference dynamics and agent diversity. PhD Thesis, ILLC, University of Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Messick, D. M. (1985). Social interdependence and decision making. In Wright, G., editor. Behavioral Decision Making. New York, NY: Plenum, pp. 87–109.Google Scholar
Osherson, D., & Weinstein, S, (To appear). Modal logic for preference based on reasons. In Tannen, V., editor. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar
Osherson, D., & Weinstein, S, (Forthcoming). Two approaches to the logic of preference.Google Scholar
Payne, J. W., & Puto, C. (1982). Adding asymmetrically dominated alternatives: Violations of regularity and the similarity hypothesis. The Journal of Consumer Research, 9, 90–95.Google Scholar
Pettit, P. (2002). Rules, Reasons, and Norms. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Savage, L. J. (1954). The Foundations of Statistics. New York, NY: Wiley.Google Scholar
Sen, A. (1971). Choice functions and revealed preference. Review of Economic Studies, 38, 307–317.Google Scholar
Stalnaker, R. (1968). A theory of conditionals. In Rescher, N., editor. Studies in logical theory. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Tentori, K., Osherson, D., Hasher, L., & May, C. (2001). Wisdom and aging: Irrational preferences in college students but not older adults. Cognition, 81, B87–B96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Benthem, J., Girard, P. K., & Roy, O. (2009). Everything else being equal: A modal logic for Ceteris Paribus preferences. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 38, 83–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Benthem, J., & Liu, F. (2007). Dynamic logic of preference upgrade. Journal of Applied Non-Classical Logic, 17, 157–182.Google Scholar
von Wright, G. H. (1963). The Logic of Preference. Edinburgh, UK: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar