more on this theme     |     more from this thinker


Single Idea 14693

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

Full Idea

Counterpart-theoretic modal semantics allows for the retention of S5 modal propositional logic, at a considerable cost.

Gist of Idea

The unsatisfactory counterpart-theory allows the retention of S5

Source

Nathan Salmon (The Logic of What Might Have Been [1989], V n18)

Book Ref

Salmon,Nathan: 'Metaphysics, Mathematics and Meaning' [OUP 2005], p.149


A Reaction

See the other ideas in this paper by Salmon for his general attack on S5 as the appropriate system for metaphysical necessity. He favours the very modest System T.


The 27 ideas from 'The Logic of What Might Have Been'

For metaphysics, T may be the only correct system of modal logic [Salmon,N]
System B has not been justified as fallacy-free for reasoning on what might have been [Salmon,N]
In B it seems logically possible to have both p true and p is necessarily possibly false [Salmon,N]
Metaphysical (alethic) modal logic concerns simple necessity and possibility (not physical, epistemic..) [Salmon,N]
What is necessary is not always necessarily necessary, so S4 is fallacious [Salmon,N]
Impossible worlds are also ways for things to be [Salmon,N]
Possible worlds are maximal abstract ways that things might have been [Salmon,N]
Possible worlds just have to be 'maximal', but they don't have to be consistent [Salmon,N]
You can't define worlds as sets of propositions, and then define propositions using worlds [Salmon,N]
Nomological necessity is expressed with intransitive relations in modal semantics [Salmon,N]
Any property is attached to anything in some possible world, so I am a radical anti-essentialist [Salmon,N]
Metaphysical necessity is said to be unrestricted necessity, true in every world whatsoever [Salmon,N]
Bizarre identities are logically but not metaphysically possible, so metaphysical modality is restricted [Salmon,N]
Logical necessity is free of constraints, and may accommodate all of S5 logic [Salmon,N]
Logical possibility contains metaphysical possibility, which contains nomological possibility [Salmon,N]
Denial of impossible worlds involves two different confusions [Salmon,N]
Without impossible worlds, how things might have been is the only way for things to be [Salmon,N]
Possible worlds rely on what might have been, so they can' be used to define or analyse modality [Salmon,N]
Necessity and possibility are not just necessity and possibility according to the actual world [Salmon,N]
In the S5 account, nested modalities may be unseen, but they are still there [Salmon,N]
Metaphysical necessity is NOT truth in all (unrestricted) worlds; necessity comes first, and is restricted [Salmon,N]
A world is 'accessible' to another iff the first is possible according to the second [Salmon,N]
Without impossible worlds, the unrestricted modality that is metaphysical has S5 logic [Salmon,N]
S5 modal logic ignores accessibility altogether [Salmon,N]
S5 believers say that-things-might-have-been-that-way is essential to ways things might have been [Salmon,N]
System B implies that possibly-being-realized is an essential property of the world [Salmon,N]
The unsatisfactory counterpart-theory allows the retention of S5 [Salmon,N]