Research output

Article in Journal ()

Modal Knowledge and Counterfactual Knowledge

Citation
Roca-Royes S (2011) Modal Knowledge and Counterfactual Knowledge, Logique et Analyse, 54 (216), pp. 537-552.

Abstract
The paper compares the suitability of two different epistemologies of counterfactuals—(EC) and (W)—to elucidate modal knowledge. I argue that, while both of them explain the data on our knowledge of counterfactuals, neither can subsume modal knowledge. (EC) would be available only to extreme haecceitists. Only (W)—Williamson’s epistemology—is compatible with all counterpossibles being true; something on which Williamson’s account relies. A first problem is that, in the absence of further data for (W) and against (EC), Williamson’s choice of (W) is objectionably biased. A second, deeper problem is that (W) cannot satisfactorily elucidate modal knowledge. Third, from a naturalistic perspective, the nature of this second problem favours (EC) against (W).

Keywords
Epistemology of Modality; Counterfactuals; Conceivability; Essentialism

StatusPublished
AuthorsRoca-Royes Sonia
Publication date2011
URLhttp://www.vub.ac.be/CLWF/L&A/
PublisherNational Centre for Logical Investigation
ISSN 0024-5836
LanguageEnglish

Journal
Logique et Analyse: Volume 54, Issue 216 (2011)

© University of Stirling FK9 4LA Scotland UK • Telephone +44 1786 473171 • Scottish Charity No SC011159
My Portal