Rosen's 1990 'Modal Fictionalism' argument shows that treating worlds as mere fictions generates a vicious circularity, since the fictionalist operator itself requires modal analysis.

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

1 reason for

1 reason against

Reasons For

1 perspective

Reason for

1.The fictionalist operator 'according to the fiction' requires understanding what *could be* true in the fiction, which is irreducibly modal.
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.To avoid circularity, fictionalism needs a non-modal account of possibility, but no such account is available without presupposing modality.
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.If modal fictionalism reduces modality to fiction, but fiction requires modal operators to be coherent, the reduction is viciously circular.
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

Reasons Against

1 perspective

Reason against

1.The fictionalist operator can be explained pragmatically (as a speech act) without requiring modal analysis of what 'could' be in fictions.
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.Circularity between modality and fictionalism is benign if both concepts are interdependent primitives, not if one reduces to the other.
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.Rosen's argument assumes fictionalism must *eliminate* modal notions entirely, but fictionalism could accept modality as basic and non-reducible.
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

Next step

Based on where you are in your exploration

Strongest counterpoint

Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

Key Terms

Fictionalist operator(as the concept that requires further explanation): The logical tool or device that fictionalists use to frame statements as 'according to the fiction' rather than literally true.
Rosen(as the philosopher whose distinction is being discussed): Gideon Rosen is a contemporary philosopher who works on metaphysics and metaethics—basically, he thinks deeply about what exists and whether moral facts are real.
Worlds (possible worlds)(as the objects treated by fictionalism): Hypothetical complete scenarios or ways reality could have been; philosophers use this concept to think through what's possible versus necessary.
modal(in logic and metaphysics): Dealing with possibility and necessity—questions about what could be true, what must be true, and what's merely contingent (could go either way).
modal analysis(Philosophy of ability and linguistic semantics): The semantic view that ability ascriptions of the form 'S is able to A' are analyzed as possibility claims quantifying over possible worlds
modal fictionalism(Rosen 1990's version, which employs David Lewis's modal realism as the fiction): The strategy of treating modal realism (the thesis that there are many co-existing concrete possible worlds) as a useful fiction rather than literal truth, and using it to paraphrase modal claims via a biconditional linking necessity to what holds according to the fiction
vicious circularity(Psillos's criterion for distinguishing benign from vicious rule-circular arguments): A circularity in which the use of an inferential rule guarantees a positive conclusion about that rule's own reliability, thereby providing no independent justification

Connections

2 topics

Modality & Possibility1 linked Philosophy of Language1 linked

Circularity between modality and fictionalism is benign if both concepts are int...If modal fictionalism reduces modality to fiction, but fiction requires modal op...

Details

Type: claim
Perspectives: 2 (1 for, 1 against)
Edits: 1 edit