Naturalización de la Metafísica Modal

Dissertation, National Autonomous University of Mexico (2021)
  Copy   BIBTEX


⦿ In my dissertation I introduce, motivate and take the first steps in the implementation of, the project of naturalising modal metaphysics: the transformation of the field into a chapter of the philosophy of science rather than speculative, autonomous metaphysics. ⦿ In the introduction, I explain the concept of naturalisation that I apply throughout the dissertation, which I argue to be an improvement on Ladyman and Ross' proposal for naturalised metaphysics. I also object to Williamson's proposal that modal metaphysics --- or some view in the area --- is already a quasi-scientific discipline. ⦿ Recently, some philosophers have argued that the notion of metaphysical modality is as ill defined as to be of little theoretical utility. In the second chapter I intend to contribute to such skepticism. First, I observe that each of the proposed marks of the concept, except for factivity, is highly controversial; thus, its logical structure is deeply obscure. With the failure of the "first principles" approach, I examine the paradigmatic intended applications of the concept, and argue that each makes it a device for a very specific and controversial project: a device, therefore, for which a naturalist will find no use for. I conclude that there is no well-defined or theoretically useful notion of objective necessity other than logical or physical necessity, and I suggest that naturalising modal metaphysics can provide more stable methodological foundations. ⦿ In the third chapter I answer a possible objection against the in-principle viability of the project: that the concept of metaphysical modality cannot be understood through the philosophical analysis of any scientific theory, since metaphysical necessity "transcends'' natural necessity, and science only deals with the latter. I argue that the most important arguments for this transcendence thesis fail or face problems that, as of today, remain unsolved. ⦿ Call the idea that science doesn't need modality, "demodalism''. Demodalism is a first step in a naturalistic argument for modal antirealism. In the fourth chapter I examine six versions of demodalism to explain why a family of formalisms, that I call "spaces of possibility'', are (i) used in a quasi-ubiquitous way in mathematised sciences (I provide examples from theoretical computer science to microeconomics), (ii) scientifically interpreted in modal terms, and (iii) used for at least six important tasks: (1) defining laws and theories; (2) defining important concepts from different sciences (I give several examples); (3) making essential classifications; (4) providing different types of explanations; (5) providing the connection between theory and statistics, and (6) understanding the transition between a theory and its successor (as is the case with quantisation). ⦿ In fifth chapter I propose and defend a naturalised modal ontology. This is a realism about modal structure: my realism about constraints. The modal structure of a system are the relationships between its possible states and between its possible states and those of other systems. It is given by the plurality of restrictions to which said system is subject. A constraint is a factor that explains the impossibility of a class of states; I explain this concept further. First, I defend my point of view by rejecting some of its main rivals: constructive empiricism, Humean conventionalism, and wave function realism, as they fail to make sense of quantum chaos. This is because the field requires the notion of objective modal structure, and the mentioned views have trouble explaining the modal facts of quantum dynamics. Then, I argue that constraint realism supersedes these views in the context of Bohm's standard theory and mechanics, and underpins the study of quantum chaos. Finally, I consider and reject two possible problems for my point of view. ⦿ A central concern of modal metaphysicians has been to understand the logical system that best characterises necessity. In the sixth chapter I intend to recover the logical project applied to my naturalistic modal metaphysics. Scientists and philosophers of science accept different degrees of physical necessity, ranging from purely mathematically necessary facts that restrict physical behaviour, to kinetic principles, to particular dynamical constraints. I argue that this motivates a multimodal approach to modal logic, and that the time dependence of dynamics motivates a logic of historical necessity. I propose multimodal propositional (classical) logics for Bohmian mechanics and the Everettian theory of many divergent worlds, and I close with a criticism of Williamson's approach to the logic of state spaces of dynamic systems.



External links

  • This entry has no external links. Add one.
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Deus atque id quod fieri potest.Gualterius Redmond - 2004 - Tópicos: Revista de Filosofía 27 (1):113-128.
Condiciones de posibilidad del conocimiento y espacios de posibilidad lógica.Angélica María Rodríguez Ortiz - 2020 - Pensamiento. Revista de Investigación E Información Filosófica 75 (287):1393-1410.
Verdad necesaria versus teorema de lógica modal.Manuel Perez Otero - 1996 - Theoria: Revista de Teoría, Historia y Fundamentos de la Ciencia 11 (1):185-201.
Los fundamentos onto-lógicos de la metafísica de Alain Badiou: la relación entre ser y ser-ahí.Mikel Varela Pequeño - 2019 - Logos. Anales Del Seminario de Metafísica [Universidad Complutense de Madrid, España] 52:139-159.
Un análisis dei concepto de cognoscibilidad desde la semántica de mundos posibles.Javier Vilanova - 1999 - Theoria: Revista de Teoría, Historia y Fundamentos de la Ciencia 14 (3):413-429.
Dos modos de apariencia: Hegel Y Hannah Arendt.Elkin Fabian Martinez - 2018 - Revista Opinião Filosófica 9 (1):194-223.
Dios y modalidad.Walter Redmond - 1993 - Areté. Revista de Filosofía 5 (1):53-70.
¿QUÉ METAFÍSICA PARA QUÉ ANTROPOLOGÍA FILOSÓFICA?Miguel Acosta - 2005 - Thémata: Revista de Filosofía 35:459-466.


Added to PP

969 (#13,224)

6 months
253 (#8,246)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Carlos Romero
Universidad Catolica de Valparaiso

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Writing the Book of the World.Theodore Sider - 2011 - Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
On the Plurality of Worlds.David K. Lewis - 1986 - Malden, Mass.: Wiley-Blackwell.
Two Dogmas of Empiricism.W. Quine - 1951 - [Longmans, Green].
Does conceivability entail possibility.David J. Chalmers - 2002 - In Tamar Szabo Gendler & John Hawthorne (eds.), Conceivability and Possibility. Oxford University Press. pp. 145--200.
Laws and symmetry.Bas C. van Fraassen - 1989 - New York: Oxford University Press.

View all 237 references / Add more references