Webbläsaren som du använder stöds inte av denna webbplats. Alla versioner av Internet Explorer stöds inte längre, av oss eller Microsoft (läs mer här: * https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/windows/end-of-ie-support).

Var god och använd en modern webbläsare för att ta del av denna webbplats, som t.ex. nyaste versioner av Edge, Chrome, Firefox eller Safari osv.

Physical Necessity and Necessity Tout Court.

Författare

  • George Masterton

Summary, in English

The very last of words of Naming and Necessity are `The third lecture

suggests that a good deal of what contemporary philosophy regards as

mere physical necessity is actually necessary tout court. The question

how far this can be pushed is one I leave for further work.' Kripke (1980).

To my knowledge he never conducted that further work; moreover, no

one following him has wished to take up the baton either. Herein, I argue

that, in general, physical necessity is neither reducible to, nor implies,

tout court necessity. Furthermore, it is demonstrated that even if Kripke's

speculations are restricted to a subset of the physical necessities where it

might be granted that all such are necessary tout court, physical necessity

is still not reducible to tout court necessity.

Avdelning/ar

Publiceringsår

2012

Språk

Engelska

Sidor

175-182

Publikation/Tidskrift/Serie

Metaphysica

Volym

13

Dokumenttyp

Artikel i tidskrift

Förlag

Springer

Ämne

  • Philosophy

Aktiv

Published

ISBN/ISSN/Övrigt

  • ISSN: 1437-2053