A structured argumentation framework for detaching conditional obligations

TL;DR

This paper introduces a formal argumentation framework for analyzing when conditional obligations can be detached as unconditional obligations, using Dung-style semantics and modular extensions.

Contribution

It presents a novel, general formal system for detaching conditional obligations with a Dung-style argumentation approach and compares it to existing methods.

Findings

Framework effectively determines detachment of obligations

Modular extensions demonstrate flexibility of the approach

Comparison shows advantages over related approaches

Abstract

We present a general formal argumentation system for dealing with the detachment of conditional obligations. Given a set of facts, constraints, and conditional obligations, we answer the question whether an unconditional obligation is detachable by considering reasons for and against its detachment. For the evaluation of arguments in favor of detaching obligations we use a Dung-style argumentation-theoretical semantics. We illustrate the modularity of the general framework by considering some extensions, and we compare the framework to some related approaches from the literature.