Philosophy Lexicon of Arguments

Author Item Excerpt Meta data

Books on Amazon
I 64
Metaphysically necessary/Metaphysical possibility/Lewis/Stalnaker: that means: if you have a range of all possibilities, you can quantify about it - the modal operators are then the quantifiers - error: one can also be mistaken, but only about how one should understand a sentence - not about how a possible situation would have to be.
I 102
Def metaphysically possible world/Metaphysically possible/Stalnaker: are all possible worlds - ((s) they are not a particular subset of all possible worlds, metaphysical is not something "special" - if a world is not metaphysically possible, it is impossible - if there are metaphysical laws, then they are contingent.
I 102
Metaphysically possible/Metaphysical possibility/Epistemic/Kripke/Stalnaker: Kripke: There are epistemic possibilities that are metaphysically impossible. - E.g. that water is not H2O - E.g.that Charles is not the son of Elizabeth II. - Kripke: But these are metaphysical possibilities in other description.
I 167
Metaphysically possible/Kripke/Stalnaker: E.g. Shakespeare didn’t have to write any of his works - but he could not have been anything other than a human being -" he could not have had other parents than the ones he had - (essentialism).
I 168
Some VsKripke: Shakespeare could have had some properties counterfactually, but not all.

Explanation of symbols: Roman numerals indicate the source, arabic numerals indicate the page number. The corresponding books are indicated on the right hand side. ((s)…): Comment by the sender of the contribution.

Sta I
R. Stalnaker
Ways a World may be Oxford New York 2003

> Counter arguments against Stalnaker

> Suggest your own contribution | > Suggest a correction | > Export as BibTeX Datei
Ed. Martin Schulz, access date 2017-06-27