more from this thinker
|
more from this text
Single Idea 10933
[filed under theme 10. Modality / A. Necessity / 3. Types of Necessity
]
Full Idea
The usual view is that 'physical possibilities' are a natural subset of the 'metaphysical possibilities', which in turn are a subset of the 'logical possibilities'.
Gist of Idea
Physical possibility is part of metaphysical possibility which is part of logical possibility
Source
Adolph Rami (Essential vs Accidental Properties [2008], §1)
Book Ref
'Stanford Online Encyclopaedia of Philosophy', ed/tr. Stanford University [plato.stanford.edu], p.4
A Reaction
[She cites Fine 2002 for an opposing view] I prefer 'natural' to 'physical', leaving it open where the borders of the natural lie. I take 'metaphysical' possibility to be 'in all naturally possible worlds'. So is a round square a logical possibility?
The
26 ideas
with the same theme
[different ways in which things must be]:
1690
|
A stone travels upwards by a forced necessity, and downwards by natural necessity
[Aristotle]
|
21389
|
Carneades distinguished logical from causal necessity, when talking of future events
[Long on Carneades]
|
21362
|
Necessity is physical, logical, mathematical or moral
[Schopenhauer, by Janaway]
|
9442
|
The only necessity is logical necessity
[Wittgenstein]
|
13576
|
Necessities are distinguished by their grounds, not their different modalities
[Ellis]
|
6987
|
We should not multiply senses of necessity beyond necessity
[Jackson]
|
15291
|
There is 'absolute' necessity (implied by all propositions) and 'relative' necessity (from what is given)
[Harré/Madden]
|
16466
|
Strong necessity is always true; weak necessity is cannot be false
[Stalnaker]
|
14680
|
Logical possibility contains metaphysical possibility, which contains nomological possibility
[Salmon,N]
|
9205
|
The three basic types of necessity are metaphysical, natural and normative
[Fine,K]
|
15079
|
'Conceptual' necessity is narrow logical necessity, true because of concepts and logical laws
[Lowe]
|
16533
|
Logical necessities, based on laws of logic, are a proper sub-class of metaphysical necessities
[Lowe]
|
8261
|
Maybe not-p is logically possible, but p is metaphysically necessary, so the latter is not absolute
[Hale]
|
15080
|
'Relative' necessity is just a logical consequence of some statements ('strong' if they are all true)
[Hale]
|
15081
|
A strong necessity entails a weaker one, but not conversely; possibilities go the other way
[Hale]
|
13721
|
'Strong' necessity in all possible worlds; 'weak' necessity in the worlds where the relevant objects exist
[Sider]
|
19286
|
'Absolute necessity' is when there is no restriction on the things which necessitate p
[Hale]
|
19288
|
Logical and metaphysical necessities differ in their vocabulary, and their underlying entities
[Hale]
|
19290
|
Absolute necessities are necessarily necessary
[Hale]
|
7800
|
Analytic truths are divided into logically and conceptually necessary
[Girle]
|
4646
|
Is 'events have causes' analytic a priori, synthetic a posteriori, or synthetic a priori?
[Baggini /Fosl]
|
9482
|
If the laws necessarily imply p, that doesn't give a new 'nomological' necessity
[Bird]
|
13244
|
Relevant necessity is always true for some situation (not all situations)
[Beall/Restall]
|
10933
|
Physical possibility is part of metaphysical possibility which is part of logical possibility
[Rami]
|
14703
|
Superficial necessity is true in all worlds; deep necessity is thus true, no matter which world is actual
[Schroeter]
|
14532
|
A distinctive type of necessity is found in logical consequence
[Rumfitt, by Hale/Hoffmann,A]
|