In this talk, I shall rehearse some of the so-called paradoxes of deontic logic, viz. Ross’s paradox and the paradoxes of contrary-to-duty obligations, argue that what has come to be known as Standard Deontic Logic (SDL) can be rendered immune to the objections these particular paradoxes are alleged to present, and do so by first showing that they rest on too simple a conception of what it takes to discharge one’s obligations, before I then go on to devise a more sophisticated account consonant with SDL.
