more on this theme | more from this thinker
Full Idea
The dilemma is that to give the ultimate source of any necessity, we must either appeal to something which could not have been otherwise (i.e. is itself necessary), or advert to something which could have been otherwise (i.e. is itself merely contingent).
Gist of Idea
Explanation of necessity must rest on something necessary or something contingent
Source
Bob Hale (The Source of Necessity [2002], p.301)
Book Ref
-: 'Philosophical Perspectives' [-], p.301
A Reaction
[Hale is summarising Blackburn's view, and going on to disagree with it] Hale looks for a third way, but Blackburn seems to face us with quite a plausible dilemma.
| 12432 | Explanation of necessity must rest on something necessary or something contingent [Hale] |
| 12433 | If necessity rests on linguistic conventions, those are contingent, so there is no necessity [Hale] |
| 12434 | Why is this necessary, and what is necessity in general; why is this necessary truth true, and why necessary? [Hale] |
| 12435 | The explanation of a necessity can be by a truth (which may only happen to be a necessary truth) [Hale] |
| 12436 | Concept-identities explain how we know necessities, not why they are necessary [Hale] |