The Logic of Contingent Existence

Dissertation, University of Massachusetts Amherst (1997)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Among modal claims, claims that involve the notions of broadly logical possibility and necessity, one that seems almost trivial is this: that if some proposition is possible, then it is possibly true. However, there is an argument, due in its essentials to the medieval philosopher and logician Jean Buridan, to the effect that this seemingly trivial claim is, in fact, untrue. ;Briefly put, the argument is this. Let Q be the proposition that Quine does not exist. Since Quine's existence is contingent, Q is possible. But, propositions are ontologically dependent upon their constituents, and Quine is a constituent of Q. So, necessarily, were Quine not to exist, neither would Q exist. And, a necessary condition of a proposition's being true is that it exist. Hence, there are propositions, such as Q, that are possible, but not possibly true. I call this conclusion, together with certain other similar claims, 'Buridanism'. ;My main topic is the evaluation of the argument for Buridanism, and the exploration of the consequences of Buridanism for modalist theories of possible worlds and for modal logic. I begin by examining the two crucial premises in the argument for Buridanism: N-dependency, according to which propositions expressed by sentences containing proper names are singular propositions that depend ontologically upon the referents of those names, and Buridan's Thesis, according to which a proposition can be neither necessary, nor possible, nor true, unless it exists. ;Robert Adams has argued that accepting Buridanism forces us to revise the modalist conception of possible worlds as maximal and consistent propositions or sets of propositions. I show that this is not the case, and provide an analysis of a proposition's being true relative to a world that allows us to maintain the modalist account while embracing Buridanism. ;Standard systems of quantified modal logic are prone to several related problems that I refer to as the problems of contingency. These systems often include as theorems formulas that seem to presuppose that everything that exists, exists necessarily. I develop a system of modal logic, BML, based upon Buridanism, that is able to overcome these difficulties

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,590

External links

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

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Logic and contingent existence.Peter Loptson - 1980 - History and Philosophy of Logic 1 (1-2):171-185.
Singular Propositions and Modal Logic.Christopher Menzel - 1993 - Philosophical Topics 21 (2):113-148.
Propositions, Sets, and Worlds.Dale Jacquette - 2006 - Studia Logica 82 (3):337-343.
The limits of modality.Sam Cowling - 2011 - Philosophical Quarterly 61 (244):473-495.
An Ontological Argument for Modal Realism.Michael Losonsky - 1988 - Grazer Philosophische Studien 31 (1):165-177.
Propositions and necessary existence.Vittorio Morato - 2006 - Grazer Philosophische Studien 72 (1):211-231.

Analytics

Added to PP
2015-02-05

Downloads
21 (#173,985)

6 months
6 (#1,472,471)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Dan Kervick
Saint Anselm College

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Meaning and Necessity: A Study in Semantics and Modal Logic.Rudolf Carnap - 1947 - Chicago, IL, USA: University of Chicago Press.
The Nature of Necessity.Alvin Plantinga - 1974 - Oxford, England: Clarendon Press.
Modal Logic: An Introduction.Brian F. Chellas - 1980 - New York: Cambridge University Press.
The concept of logical consequence.John Etchemendy - 1990 - Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Abstract.[author unknown] - 2011 - Dialogue and Universalism 21 (4):447-449.

View all 28 references / Add more references