Skip to main content
Log in

Prior’s defence of Hintikka’s theorem. A discussion of Prior’s ‘The logic of obligation and the obligations of the logician’

  • Published:
Synthese Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In his paper, The logic of obligation and the obligations of the logician, A.N. Prior considers Hintikka’s theorem, according to which a statement cannot be both impossible and permissible. This theorem has been seen as problematic for the very idea of a logic of obligation. However, Prior rejects the view that the logic of obligation cannot be formalised. He sees this resistance against such a view as an important part of what could be called the obligation of the logician. Prior argues that Hintikka’s theorem should not be seen as something paradoxical. On the contrary, it should be seen as a fully acceptable consequence of a basic and reasonable assumption in deontic logic, namely Hintikka’s rule.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Prior A. (1955) Formal logic. The Clarendon Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Prior A. (1956) Modality and quantification in S5. The Journal of Symbolic Logic 21: 60–62

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Peter Øhrstrøm.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Øhrstrøm, P., Zeller, J. & Sandborg-Petersen, U. Prior’s defence of Hintikka’s theorem. A discussion of Prior’s ‘The logic of obligation and the obligations of the logician’. Synthese 188, 449–454 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-011-9936-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-011-9936-2

Keywords

Navigation