Abstract
Abstract Could you have been a different height? Are the laws of nature contingent? Are talking donkeys possible? Such questions admit of no easy answers. Could you have been a different height? For that to be so, myriad other things would have had to be different. Could they have been? Again, for each of those things, still other things would have had to be different. Modal questions of this sort evidently pose epistemological challenges of the highest order. The suggestion that modal truths are epistemologically vexed might be thought to be deeply at odds with the account of modality associated with David Lewis. Lewis’s approach to modality has been widely misunderstood, however, by its advocates and its detractors alike. Rightly understood, Lewis’s ‘Humean’ cosmos has more in common with Spinoza than with Hume. The upshot is a rapprochement between Lewis’s Humeanism and an increasingly popular Aristotelian challenger.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
