A Combinatorial Theory of Possibility

Abstract

David Armstrong's book is a contribution to the philosophical discussion about possible worlds. Taking Wittgenstein's Tractatus as his point of departure, Professor Armstrong argues that nonactual possibilities and possible worlds are recombinations of actually existing elements, and as such are useful fictions. There is an extended criticism of the alternative-possible-worlds approach championed by the American philosopher David Lewis. This major work will be read with interest by a wide range of philosophers.

Can Modal Skepticism Defeat Humean Skepticism?

“…If it is reasonable to believe that F is a possible property for object o 1 and o 2 appears relevantly similar to o 1 , then it is reasonable to believe that F is a possible property of o 2 . 23 3.…”

“…According to strong recombination, since my car is black-all-over and my car is not crimson-all- 25 A principle of recombination has found support in the literature, notably by David Lewis [24, pp.86-92] and David Armstrong [1], though they understand the principle foremost along metaphysical lines. Of the principles of recombination I list, modest recombination is closest in statement to the principles that Lewis and Armstrong endorse, though the details of their accounts results in their versions of the principle having more elaborate consequences than I would be prepared to endorse.…”

“…Properly framed, (i) and (ii) are a consequence of (a modest version of) the 1 Hume and especially Descartes are often pointed to as philosophers that embrace unconstrained conceivability techniques as a guide to possibility. Recent sophisticated advocates of conceivability techniques -such as Yablo [31], Chalmers [4] and, on one reading, Bealer [2] -take great care to separate out different senses of "conceivable" and fix upon more and less promising candidates.…”

Yes: Bare Particulars!

“…As I understand Armstrong 'thick particular' and 'thin particular' are terms with different senses but which stand for the same thing, like 'Superman' and 'Clark Kent'. I'm not sure how helpful Armstrong's terminology is but the view he uses it to express in (Armstrong 1978) seems to be something like the Identity Theory. of place they would want to end up -does the Identity Theory really give Bare Particularists what they want Ð given that it doesnÕt state that substances involve, in any way, bare particulars?…”

Counterfactuals, Probabilities, and Information: Response to Critics

“…To begin, possible worlds have proven useful in a large variety of philosophical projects; consequently, many will regard the appeal to possible worlds in a theory of information as previously justified by their other fruits. In any case, commitment to possible worlds is only ontologically costly given inflationary understandings of possible worlds (e.g., Lewis, 1986) -and, of course, there are deflationary (e.g., fictionalist, abstractionist, instrumentalist) alternatives available (e.g., Rosen, 1990;Armstrong, 1989;van Inwagen, 1986;van Fraassen, 1980;Forbes, 1983;Yablo, 2001). Hence, we don't see that the counterfactual account, by being committed to possible worlds, carries onerous special burdens.…”