@misc{Lexicon of Arguments, title = {Quotation from: Lexicon of Arguments – Concepts - Ed. Martin Schulz, 28 Mar 2024}, author = {Wessel, H.}, subject = {Necessity}, note = {I 126 Necessary/Wessel: often: "~ p > p" interpreted as necessary - Problem: no way to differentiate between "p" and "p is necessary". >Logical necessity, >Logical possibility. "Logically impossible": "p> ~ p": then "~ p" and "p is impossible" equivalent. >Equivalence. I 344 Necessity/Wessel: when I designate a sentence as needed, I give a hint about my judgment reasons. >Judgments, >Reasoning, >Justification. Possibility: Speaker abstains from judgment. >Possibility, cf. >Score keeping. I 350 Logical/physically necessary/Wessel: 1. what is logically necessary is also factually necessary 2. What is factually possible is also logically possible 3. What is factually not necessary, is also not logically necessary 4. what is logically impossible , is also factually impossible. >Stronger/weaker, >Strength of theories. Logical modality sets limits on the factual modality - because logical modality alone from linguistic requirements, not ontologically. Logical truth is equivalent to logical demonstrability and logical necessity. >Provability, >Modalities, >Logical truth. Logical falsifiability is equivalent to logical falsehood and logical impossibility. >Contradictions, >Consistency.}, note = { Wessel I H. Wessel Logik Berlin 1999 }, file = {http://philosophy-science-humanities-controversies.com/listview-details.php?id=251943} url = {http://philosophy-science-humanities-controversies.com/listview-details.php?id=251943} }