more from this thinker | more from this text
Full Idea
Deontic accessibility seems not to be reflexive (that it ought to be true doesn't make it true). One could argue that it is serial (that there is always a world where something is acceptable).
Gist of Idea
Intuitively, deontic accessibility seems not to be reflexive, but to be serial
Source
Theodore Sider (Logic for Philosophy [2010], 6.3.1)
Book Ref
Sider,Theodore: 'Logic for Philosophy' [OUP 2010], p.142
14971 | D is valid on every serial frame, but not where there are dead ends [Cresswell] |
13114 | □P → P is not valid in D (Deontic Logic), since an obligatory action may be not performed [Fitting/Mendelsohn] |
9743 | The system D has the 'serial' conditon imposed on its accessibility relation [Fitting/Mendelsohn] |
13706 | Intuitively, deontic accessibility seems not to be reflexive, but to be serial [Sider] |
13710 | In D we add that 'what is necessary is possible'; then tautologies are possible, and contradictions not necessary [Sider] |
19033 | Deontic modalities are 'ought-to-be', for sentences, and 'ought-to-do' for predicates [Vetter] |