Physical Necessity and Necessity Tout Court.
Author
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.
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.
Department/s
Publishing year
2012
Language
English
Pages
175-182
Publication/Series
Metaphysica
Volume
13
Document type
Journal article
Publisher
Springer
Topic
- Philosophy
Status
Published
ISBN/ISSN/Other
- ISSN: 1437-2053