Maximality vs. Optimality in Dyadic Deontic Logic

This paper reports completeness results for dyadic deontic logics in the tradition of Hansson’s systems. There are two ways to understand the core notion of best antecedent- worlds, which underpins such systems. One is in terms of maximality, and the other in terms of optimality. Depending on the choice being made, one gets different evaluation rules for the deontic modalities, but also different versions of the so-called limit assumption. Four of them are disentangled, and compared. The main observation of this paper is that, even in the partial order case, the contrast between maximality and optimality is not as significant as one could expect, because the logic remains the same whatever notion of best is used. This is established by showing that, given analogous properties for the betterness relation, the same system is sound and complete with respect to its intended modelling. The chief resultofthispaperconcernsA ̊qvist’ssystemFsupplementedwiththeprinciple(CM)of cautious monotony. It is established that, under the maximality rule, F+(CM) is sound and complete with respect to the class of models in which the betterness relation is required be reflexive and smooth (for maximality). From this, a number of spin-off results are obtained. First and foremost, it is shown that a similar determination result holds for optimality; that is, under the optimality rule, F+(CM) is also sound and complete with respect to the class of models in which the betterness relation is reflexive and smooth (for optimality). Other spin-off results concern classes of models in which further constraints are placed on the betterness relation, like totalness and transitivity.