more on this theme     |     more from this thinker


Single Idea 11118

[filed under theme 10. Modality / C. Sources of Modality / 5. Modality from Actuality ]

Full Idea

Where modal propositions may once have seemed to transcend the actual, they now seem only to transcend the concrete.

Gist of Idea

Modal propositions transcend the concrete, but not the actual

Source

Michael Jubien (Analyzing Modality [2007], 4)

Book Ref

'Oxford Studies in Metaphysics vol.3', ed/tr. Zimmerman,Dean W. [OUP 2007], p.122


A Reaction

This is because Jubien has defended a form of platonism. Personally I take modal propositions to be perceptible in the concrete world, by recognising the processes involved, not the mere static stuff.


The 14 ideas from 'Analyzing Modality'

Your properties, not some other world, decide your possibilities [Jubien]
Modal truths are facts about parts of this world, not about remote maximal entities [Jubien]
We have no idea how many 'possible worlds' there might be [Jubien]
If there are no other possible worlds, do we then exist necessarily? [Jubien]
If all possible worlds just happened to include stars, their existence would be necessary [Jubien]
Possible worlds just give parallel contingencies, with no explanation at all of necessity [Jubien]
If other worlds exist, then they are scattered parts of the actual world [Jubien]
Worlds don't explain necessity; we use necessity to decide on possible worlds [Jubien]
We mustn't confuse a similar person with the same person [Jubien]
Being a physical object is our most fundamental category [Jubien]
Haecceities implausibly have no qualities [Jubien]
'All horses' either picks out the horses, or the things which are horses [Jubien]
Modal propositions transcend the concrete, but not the actual [Jubien]
De re necessity is just de dicto necessity about object-essences [Jubien]