Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Logical consequence, also known as a consequence relation, or entailment; Consequent, in logic, the second half of a hypothetical proposition or consequences; Consequentialism, a theory in philosophy in which the morality of an act is determined by its effects; Unintended consequences; Consequence, in operant conditioning, a result of some behavior
The accounts discussed above all yield monotonic consequence relations, i.e. ones such that if is a consequence of , then is a consequence of any superset of . It is also possible to specify non-monotonic consequence relations to capture the idea that, e.g., 'Tweety can fly' is a logical consequence of
Influenced by 19th century positivism [5] and Charles Darwin's evolution, for both Friedrich Engels and Karl Marx, the idea of uncertainty and chance in social dynamics (and thus unintended consequences beyond results of perfectly defined laws) was only apparent, (if not rejected) since social actions were directed and produced by deliberate human intention.
A collateral consequence may simply be one that is beyond the scope of consideration. These are as opposed to direct consequences, which stem from the action in an anticipated manner. For example, picture a person starting a farm. The direct consequences of this farm's development are revenue for the farmer, produce for consumers, etc.
[4] [5] However, the meaning of the word has changed over the time since Anscombe used it: in the sense she coined it, she had explicitly placed J.S. Mill in the nonconsequentialist and W.D. Ross in the consequentialist camp, whereas, in the contemporary sense of the word, they would be classified the other way round.
PDF 2.0 defines 256-bit AES encryption as the standard for PDF 2.0 files. The PDF Reference also defines ways that third parties can define their own encryption systems for PDF. PDF files may be digitally signed, to provide secure authentication; complete details on implementing digital signatures in PDF are provided in ISO 32000-2.
The consequent in a hypothetical proposition is not necessarily a consequence of the antecedent. If monkeys are purple, then fish speak Klingon. "Fish speak Klingon" is the consequent here, but intuitively is not a consequence of (nor does it have anything to do with) the claim made in the antecedent that "monkeys are purple".
March and Olsen distinguish the logic of appropriateness from what they term the "logic of consequences," more commonly known as rational choice theory.The logic of consequences is based on the assumption that actors have fixed preferences, will make cost-benefit calculations, and choose among different options by evaluating the likely consequences for their objectives.