Single Idea 19032

[catalogued under 4. Formal Logic / D. Modal Logic ML / 3. Modal Logic Systems / h. System S5]

Full Idea

Wedgwood (2007:220) argues that S5 is undesirable because it excludes that necessary truths may have contingent grounds.

Gist of Idea

S5 is undesirable, as it prevents necessities from having contingent grounds


Barbara Vetter (Potentiality [2015], 6.4 n5)

Book Reference

Vetter,Barbara: 'Potentiality: from Dispositions to Modality' [OUP 2015], p.213

A Reaction

Cameron defends the possibility of necessity grounded in contingency, against Blackburn's denial of it. It's interesting that we choose the logic on the basis of the metaphysics. Shouldn't there be internal reasons for a logic's correctness?

Related Ideas

Idea 14529 If something underlies a necessity, is that underlying thing necessary or contingent? [Blackburn, by Hale/Hoffmann,A]

Idea 15103 Blackburn fails to show that the necessary cannot be grounded in the contingent [Cameron]