Modal claims about necessity require truth-makers, and on Humean or deflationary accounts of modality, there are no facts that ground the necessity of any concrete being's existence.

?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

Concrete being(what the statement is about (whether concrete things must exist)): An actual, physical thing that exists in the real world, like a person, object, or animal—as opposed to abstract concepts.
Deflationary accounts of modality(alternative explanation of how modal claims work): Philosophical views that say necessity and possibility aren't deep facts about reality—they're just ways we talk about what's logically consistent or what happens in different scenarios.
Humean: "Humean" refers to ideas based on the philosophy of David Hume, an 18th-century Scottish philosopher who argued that our knowledge comes from what we directly experience through our senses, not from abstract reasoning alone. A key Humean idea is that we cannot truly prove that cause and effect exist in the world—we only observe that one thing regularly follows another, and our minds make the connection. Hume's skeptical approach to knowledge and causation has influenced centuries of philosophical debate about how we understand reality.
Modal claims(the central concept being debated)

Based on where you are in your exploration