lunedì 14 gennaio 2013

From Ought (and Can) to Law (and impossibilities)

Writing and reviewing the Ph.D thesis is different from writing about your Ph.D thesis and about how is it going (i.e. one of the main issue of writing on this blog).

The new year started with some sort of planning and PhD an issue on which I should write some sort of post sooner or later. I discovered I'll have to switch to biblatex in order to have more options in using the bibliography and I think that I did a mistake in start doing the indexing of name and subject on each of the different .tex files of the chapters.

Concerning the thesis, given that - after all - mine is a PhD in philosophy of law, I am moving from Ought to Law, that is to say that my playing field to test different facets of OIC will be the one of impossibilities.
So I am again on impossible norms, commands and prescriptions but from a different point of view.

Last but not least, if you are interested in deontic logic and the logic of imperatives please go and read Peter Vranas' papers for the new foundations of both logics. The reasearch is incredibly interesting and his papers offers you a tremendous bibliography (that may frustate you if, as I do, you are not lucky enough to access all the resources Vranas is pointing to you).

martedì 13 novembre 2012

One year (and some days) later

It's something like the first year birthday of this blog (actually it was on the 9th, admitting the google alert I set was right).
It was and still is a lot of fun as well as a resource to update all this an try to restate what is not my natural language my current researches on ought implies can and more.

Actually, the longest blogging silence coincided with the biggest productive period... so maybe it's positive not to post? (Wow! I never thought there were paradoxes you may discover while blogging).

Nonetheless, mh, I submitted two papers (one was on OIC), reviewed completely the index (and the body, more or less) of the dissertation and updated the philpapers OIC entry (even if there's still a lot of work to do, such as checking the links and entries).

Now I got a wonderful part two to write on impossible attempts and legal impossibilities... more to come soon, I hope!


venerdì 24 agosto 2012

Editing PhilPapers "Ought implies Can" category.

Since less than a week I am editing the "Ought implies Can" category on PhilPapers.
I am learning and trying to accomodate bibliography and checking references at first, but I know I will have to provide to summary, key works and see-also for it.

Given the unpleasent feature of OIC of being used a lot everywhere without much discussion, it is pretty difficult for me to write them out. Here are my attempts, comments are more than welcome.

Summary
The "Ought implies Can" (OIC) thesis establishes a link between obligations and abilities. It is associated with Kant, but the Kantian attribution is debated. Its main interpretation goes along the latin motto "ad impossibilia nemo tenetur" and allows you to discharge an obligation when you lack the possibility to do what is commanded. Others interpretate it as saying that, given the fact that you have the relavant "Can", there is no way not to do what you Ought to.
OIC has been first used as an (unquestionable) principle, thesis and axioms in many fields: moral and legal philosophy (moral dilemmas, alternate possibilities), to deontic logic and epistemology (doxastic voluntarism). Since the '70s it has undergone multiple criticisms from many areas.


Key works
The article with the wider spectrum of arguments for and against OIC is Vranas 2007. Martin 2009 and Graham 2011 has further objections. For a discussion on the Kantian attribution see Stern 2004 and, if you are interested in the history of OIC, check Moore 1922. Hintikka 1969 and Jacquette 1991 are helpfull to see OIC relevance in deontic logic (check von Wright 1968 and 1983 for different uses). For the debate on "imply" see Streumer 2003.
For the importance of OIC in the debate on moral dilemmas see McConnell 2010.
The debate on OIC and the principle of alternate possibilities starts with Frankfurt 1988 and goes on at least up to Copp 2008. OIC enters doxastic volutarism with Alston 1988 is endorsed by e.g. Chuard 2009 and rejected by Ryan 2003.


Introductions
Vranas 2007
McConnell 2010
Chuard & Southwood 2009
Stern 2004
Streumer 2003


giovedì 9 agosto 2012

New location and new OIC paper(s)

I successfully moved near Verona for a while. The weather is somehow hotter than expected but for most of the day there's nothing else to than reviewing the thesis, read new paper, draft new papers and Skype working on coauthored papers.

So here are the latest updates concerning my "Ought implies Can" researches:
- the old paper on Ought implies Can and foundamental right and social rights is almost ready. I received the drafts, corrected it and should be printed in a few months. It's in Italian and, for some strange reason, here I am not criticizing OIC;

- I wrote a short paper on the varieties of Ought implies Can as a secondary norm. I will present the paper in Pavia for the 10th graduate conference in political philosophy. Scanlon and Ian Carter should be there... so I'd better practice my slides;

- I am writing two papers on what I called the "Analysis debate". I am still not convinced by the "derivation" of the principle of alternate possibilities starting from OIC;

Besides this, I start to correct my thesis draft directly on the pdf latex output rather than printing it. It's a strange experience but I think it's gonna be worth doing. I am already guessing what it would be like to look at 5-6 corrected drafts after the thesis will be over (admitting it will be over sooner or later)...

lunedì 23 luglio 2012

OIC updates: Summer School in Cologne with Ralph Wedgwood

Returning from the Summer School in Philosophy in Cologne (with Ralph Wedgwood) is pretty strange: it takes time to realize that "normativity", "epistemology" and "ought implies can" are NOT ordinary language words.
I learnt a lot, discussions were great and I have also found other people interested in OIC (more to come on this). Thanks everybody!

Concerning other OIC topics, my dissertation is progressing and I guess next days I'll be working on the general review as long as finding ways to include what I learnt in Cologne in the right chapter...
I saw the final draft on my paper on OIC and collective intionality and I plan to write soon on the OIC/PAP debate.

Now it's time to start writing emails...

lunedì 18 giugno 2012

Printing and correcting Latex output

It's a lot I am not updating byt the work keeps going on!
I managed to move from Word to Latex (a big thank to Rafal Urbaniek and Federico Faroldi) putting together some sort of "first draft" with all the different files. This means I have an ugly 180+ pages monster with a lot of bad biblio, missing \newline and quotes to be translated...

Concerning talks and so on, I've been to Riga for the Games, game theory and game semantic conference talking about constitutive rules and to the workshop on ethics in Milan... That means that I have two papers to finish and that one will be on Ought implies Can and the principle of alternate possibilities.
I am really looking forward to giving my take on PAPistry :)

mercoledì 9 maggio 2012

From Essex to Gdansk

It is quite long since last time I updated this blog.
I went to Essex University for the Ought & Can seminar and it was a terrific experience. The presentations were great as well as the discussions.
I discovered that my presentation was too dense and vague because I collapsed 2,5 different papers into one. I  am now working on them to better state the problems of deontic panglossism.

Now I reached Gdansk. From tomorrow I will benefit of talks and conference on metaethics (my current framework of OIC research). Then the plan is to work on better papers, implementing all the suggestions I received.