more on this theme     |     more from this thinker


Single Idea 12187

[filed under theme 10. Modality / C. Sources of Modality / 1. Sources of Necessity ]

Full Idea

The 'objectual modal realist' holds that what makes modal beliefs true are certain modal objects, typically 'possible worlds'. ..The 'non-objectual modal realist' says modal judgements are made true by how things stand with respect to this world.

Gist of Idea

Objectual modal realists believe in possible worlds; non-objectual ones rest it on the actual world

Source

Ian McFetridge (Logical Necessity: Some Issues [1986], §2)

Book Ref

-: 'Aristotelian Society' [], p.141


A Reaction

I am an enthusiastic 'non-objectual modal realist'. I accept the argument that real possible worlds have no relevance to the actual world, and explain nothing (see Jubien). The possibilities reside in the 'powers' of this world. See Molnar on powers.


The 10 ideas from 'Logical Necessity: Some Issues'

The fundamental case of logical necessity is the valid conclusion of an inference [McFetridge, by Hale]
In the McFetridge view, logical necessity means a consequent must be true if the antecedent is [McFetridge, by Hale]
Logical necessity requires that a valid argument be necessary [McFetridge]
Traditionally, logical necessity is the strongest, and entails any other necessities [McFetridge]
It is only logical necessity if there is absolutely no sense in which it could be false [McFetridge]
We assert epistemic possibility without commitment to logical possibility [McFetridge]
Logical necessity overrules all other necessities [McFetridge]
Objectual modal realists believe in possible worlds; non-objectual ones rest it on the actual world [McFetridge]
Modal realists hold that necessities and possibilities are part of the totality of facts [McFetridge]
The mark of logical necessity is deduction from any suppositions whatever [McFetridge]