Middle knowledge, fatalism and comparative similarity of worlds

Religious Studies 34 (2):189-203 (1998)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The doctrine of Middle Knowledge presupposes that conditionals of freedom (statements of the form 'If A were circumstances C, he would perform X') can be true. Such conditions are, where true, not true in virtue of the truth of any categorical proposition. Nor can their truth be modelled in terms of comparative similarity of possible worlds, because the structure of possible worlds is a necessary one, whereas the connection between antecedent and consequent of a conditional of freedom is a contingent one. Lewis and Stalmaker are committed to 'conditional fatalism', the view that things only would go a certain way if they would have to go that way. Although commitment to conditional fatalism does not itself import a commitment to fatalism, it is hard to find a separate motivation for it.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,219

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
50 (#304,573)

6 months
3 (#902,269)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Richard Gaskin
University of Liverpool

Citations of this work

Recent Work on Molinism.Ken Perszyk - 2013 - Philosophy Compass 8 (8):755-770.
Molinists (still) cannot endorse the consequence argument.Yishai Cohen - 2015 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 77 (3):231-246.
Leibniz, a Friend of Molinism.Juan Garcia - 2018 - Res Philosophica 95 (3):397-420.
God, Evil, and Alvin Plantinga on the Free-Will Defense.Ciro De Florio & Aldo Frigerio - 2013 - European Journal for Philosophy of Religion 5 (3):75--94.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references