On Set Theoretic Possible Worlds

Analysis 46 (2):68 - 72 (1986)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In his paper "Are There Set Theoretic Possible Worlds?", Selmer Bringsjord argued that the set theoretic definition of possible worlds proffered by, among others, Robert Adams and Alvin Plantinga is incoherent. It is the purpose of this note to evaluate that argument. The upshot: these set theoretic accounts can be preserved, but only by abandoning the power set axiom.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,709

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

Ways Things Can't Be.Greg Restall - 1997 - Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 38 (4):583-596.
An Order-Theoretic Account of Some Set-Theoretic Paradoxes.Thomas Forster & Thierry Libert - 2011 - Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 52 (1):1-19.
A Model Theoretic Semantics for Quantum Logic.E. -W. Stachow - 1980 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1980:272 - 280.
The graph-theoretic approach to descriptive set theory.Benjamin D. Miller - 2012 - Bulletin of Symbolic Logic 18 (4):554-575.
Partial worlds and paradox.Elke Brendel - 1993 - Erkenntnis 39 (2):191 - 208.
Keeping semantics pure.Dominic Gregory - 2005 - Noûs 39 (3):505–528.
Real impossible worlds : the bounds of possibility.Ira Georgia Kiourti - 2010 - Dissertation, University of St Andrews

Analytics

Added to PP
2011-05-29

Downloads
153 (#123,236)

6 months
29 (#107,386)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Christopher Menzel
Texas A&M University

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references