Combining Texts

All the ideas for 'fragments/reports', 'Of Liberty and Necessity' and 'The Problem of Possibilia'

unexpand these ideas     |    start again     |     specify just one area for these texts

---

4 ideas

1. Philosophy / D. Nature of Philosophy / 3. Philosophy Defined

23367	Even pointing a finger should only be done for a reason [Epictetus]
	Full Idea: Philosophy says it is not right even to stretch out a finger without some reason.
	From: Epictetus (fragments/reports [c.57], 15)
	A reaction: The key point here is that philosophy concerns action, an idea on which Epictetus is very keen. He rather despise theory. This idea perfectly sums up the concept of the wholly rational life (which no rational person would actually want to live!).

10. Modality / B. Possibility / 1. Possibility

9212	Possible states of affairs are not propositions; a proposition can't be a state of affairs! [Fine,K]
	Full Idea: Possible states of affairs have often been taken to be propositions, but this cannot be correct, since any possible state of affairs is possibly a state of affairs, but no proposition is possibly a state of affairs.
	From: Kit Fine (The Problem of Possibilia [2003], 2)
	A reaction: The point is, presumably, that the state of affairs cannot be the proposition itself, but (at least) what the proposition refers to. I can't see any objection to that.

10. Modality / B. Possibility / 5. Contingency

6215	'Contingent' means that the cause is unperceived, not that there is no cause [Hobbes]
	Full Idea: For contingent, men do not mean that which hath no cause, but that which hath not for cause any thing that we perceive, as when a traveller meets a shower, they both had sufficient causes, but they didn't cause one another, so we say it was contingent.
	From: Thomas Hobbes (Of Liberty and Necessity [1654], §95)
	A reaction: Contingent nowadays means 'might not have happened', or 'does not happen in all possible worlds'. Personally I share Hobbes' doubts about the concept of contingency, and this is quite a good account of the misunderstanding.

10. Modality / E. Possible worlds / 2. Nature of Possible Worlds / a. Nature of possible worlds

9213	The actual world is a possible world, so we can't define possible worlds as 'what might have been' [Fine,K]
	Full Idea: A possible world can't be defined (by Stalnaker and Plantinga) as a way the world might have been, because a possible world is possibly the world, yet no way the world might have been is possibly the world.
	From: Kit Fine (The Problem of Possibilia [2003], 2)
	A reaction: His point is that any definition of a possible world must cover the actual world, because that is one of them. 'Might have been' is not applicable to the actual world. It seems a fairly important starting point for discussion of possible worlds.