Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Therefore the correct definition of necessity requires bo... — Carmelics
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Philosophy of Language
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→Necessity must be defined as impossible falsehood plus necessary statability, not merely as impossible falsehood

    Therefore the correct definition of necessity requires both that φ could not be false and that φ is necessarily statable

    Modality & PossibilityPhilosophy of Language
    ?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.

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Topics

    Philosophy of LanguageModality & Possibility

    Related

    A statement φ can fail to be false in all worlds (because it is not statable in ...For φ to be necessarily true, the proposition φ expresses must necessarily exist...Necessity must be defined as impossible falsehood plus necessary statability, no...

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Philosophy of Language
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.

    Similar

    Diodorus defines necessity as what is true and will not be false87%Philo defines necessity as what is true and not capable of being false...87%Metaphysical necessity is a form of necessity grounded in how things c...83%Impossible falsehood of ¬φ does not imply necessary truth of φ when φ ...82%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: possibilism-actualism
    View source passageHide passage
    The logical implications of Gap are dramatic. Note first that the usual interdefinability of necessity and possibility fails. To see this for the particular case of SQML’s \(\Diamond\textbf{Def}\), consider, say, the obvious truth that Bergoglio is not a subatomic particle—say, a proton, \(\neg \sfP\sfb\). Since Bergoglio is a contingent being, there are worlds where he doesn’t exist. Hence, there are worlds where \(\neg \sfP\sfb\) fails to be statable and thus, by Gap, where it is neither tru

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective