-
[1] H. Andréka, M. Ryan, P.-Y. Schobbens, Operators and Laws for Combining Preference Relations, Journal of Logic and Computation, vol. 12(1) (2002), pp. 13–53, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/logcom/12.1.13
-
[2] A. Anglberger, F. L. G. Faroldi, J. Korbmacher, An Exact Truthmaker Semantics for Obligation and Permission, [in:] O. Roy, A. Tamminga, M. Willer (eds.), Deontic Logic and Normative Systems, DEON16, College Publications, London (2016), pp. 16–31.
-
[3] R. J. Aumann, Utility Theory without the Completeness Axiom, Econometrica, vol. 30(3) (1962), pp. 445–462, DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1909888
-
[4] F. Berto, D. Nolan, Hyperintensionality, [in:] E. N. Zalta (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, spring 2021 ed., Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University (2021).
-
[5] R. Chang, Parity, Interval Value, and Choice, Ethics, vol. 115(2) (2005), pp. 331–350, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/426307
-
[6] R. Chang, Value Incomparability and Incommensurability, [in:] I. Hirose, J. Olson (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Value Theory, Oxford University Press (2015), DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199959303.013.0012
-
[7] R. Chang, Parity: An Intuitive Case, Ratio, vol. 29(4) (2016), pp. 395–411.
-
[8] C. Constantinescu, Value Incomparability and Indeterminacy, Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, vol. 15(1) (2012), pp. 57–70, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10677-011-9269-8
-
[9] M. J. Cresswell, Hyperintensional Logic, Studia Logica, vol. 34(1) (1975), pp. 25–38, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02314421
-
[10] F. Dietrich, C. List, What Matters and How It Matters: A Choice-Theoretic Representation of Moral Theories, The Philosophical Review, (2017), pp. 421–479, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1215/00318108-4173412