more from this thinker     |     more from this text


Single Idea 15027

[filed under theme 10. Modality / C. Sources of Modality / 3. Necessity by Convention ]

Full Idea

If □φ says that φ is true by convention, then □φ would apparently turn out to be contingent, since statements about what conventions we adopt are not themselves true by convention. The main axioms of S4 and S5 would be false.

Gist of Idea

If truths are necessary 'by convention', that seems to make them contingent

Source

Theodore Sider (Writing the Book of the World [2011], 12.1)

Book Ref

Sider,Theodore: 'Writing the Book of the World' [OUP 2011], p.268

Related Idea

Idea 15000 'It is raining' and 'it is not raining' can't be legislated, so we can't legislate 'p or ¬p' [Sider]


The 11 ideas with the same theme [necessity comes from linguistic conventions]:

For each necessity in the world there is an arbitrary rule of language [Wittgenstein]
If natural necessity is used to include or exclude some predicate, the predicate is conceptually necessary [Harré/Madden]
Having a child is contingent for a 'man', necessary for a 'father'; the latter reflects a necessity of nature [Harré/Madden]
A key achievement of Kripke is showing that important modalities are not linguistic in source [Soames]
If necessity rests on linguistic conventions, those are contingent, so there is no necessity [Hale]
If truths are necessary 'by convention', that seems to make them contingent [Sider]
Conventionalism doesn't seem to apply to examples of the necessary a posteriori [Sider]
Necessary a posteriori is conventional for necessity and nonmodal for a posteriority [Sidelle, by Sider]
To know empirical necessities, we need empirical facts, plus conventions about which are necessary [Sidelle]
Conventions can only work if they are based on something non-conventional [Fogelin]
Modal Conventionalism says modality is analytic, not intrinsic to the world, and linguistic [Thomasson]