more from this thinker     |     more from this text


Single Idea 19286

[filed under theme 10. Modality / A. Necessity / 3. Types of Necessity ]

Full Idea

The strength of the claim that p is 'absolutely necessary' derives from the fact that in its expression as a universally quantified counterfactual ('everything will necessitate p'), the quantifier ranges over all propositions whatever.

Gist of Idea

'Absolute necessity' is when there is no restriction on the things which necessitate p

Source

Bob Hale (Necessary Beings [2013], 04.1)

Book Ref

Hale,Bob: 'Necessary Beings' [OUP 2013], p.99


A Reaction

Other philosophers don't seem to use the term 'absolute necessity', but it seems a useful concept, in contrast to conditional or local necessities. You can't buy chocolate on the sun.

Related Idea

Idea 15291 There is 'absolute' necessity (implied by all propositions) and 'relative' necessity (from what is given) [Harré/Madden]


The 26 ideas with the same theme [different ways in which things must be]:

A stone travels upwards by a forced necessity, and downwards by natural necessity [Aristotle]
Carneades distinguished logical from causal necessity, when talking of future events [Long on Carneades]
Necessity is physical, logical, mathematical or moral [Schopenhauer, by Janaway]
The only necessity is logical necessity [Wittgenstein]
Necessities are distinguished by their grounds, not their different modalities [Ellis]
We should not multiply senses of necessity beyond necessity [Jackson]
There is 'absolute' necessity (implied by all propositions) and 'relative' necessity (from what is given) [Harré/Madden]
Strong necessity is always true; weak necessity is cannot be false [Stalnaker]
Logical possibility contains metaphysical possibility, which contains nomological possibility [Salmon,N]
The three basic types of necessity are metaphysical, natural and normative [Fine,K]
'Conceptual' necessity is narrow logical necessity, true because of concepts and logical laws [Lowe]
Logical necessities, based on laws of logic, are a proper sub-class of metaphysical necessities [Lowe]
Maybe not-p is logically possible, but p is metaphysically necessary, so the latter is not absolute [Hale]
A strong necessity entails a weaker one, but not conversely; possibilities go the other way [Hale]
'Relative' necessity is just a logical consequence of some statements ('strong' if they are all true) [Hale]
'Strong' necessity in all possible worlds; 'weak' necessity in the worlds where the relevant objects exist [Sider]
'Absolute necessity' is when there is no restriction on the things which necessitate p [Hale]
Logical and metaphysical necessities differ in their vocabulary, and their underlying entities [Hale]
Absolute necessities are necessarily necessary [Hale]
Analytic truths are divided into logically and conceptually necessary [Girle]
Is 'events have causes' analytic a priori, synthetic a posteriori, or synthetic a priori? [Baggini /Fosl]
If the laws necessarily imply p, that doesn't give a new 'nomological' necessity [Bird]
Relevant necessity is always true for some situation (not all situations) [Beall/Restall]
Physical possibility is part of metaphysical possibility which is part of logical possibility [Rami]
Superficial necessity is true in all worlds; deep necessity is thus true, no matter which world is actual [Schroeter]
A distinctive type of necessity is found in logical consequence [Rumfitt, by Hale/Hoffmann,A]