Soft facts and ontological dependence
- Patrick Todd
- … show all 1 hide
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.Get Access
In the literature on free will, fatalism, and determinism, a distinction is commonly made between temporally intrinsic (‘hard’) and temporally relational (‘soft’) facts at times; determinism, for instance, is the thesis that the temporally intrinsic state of the world at some given past time, together with the laws, entails a unique future (relative to that time). Further, it is commonly supposed by incompatibilists that only the ‘hard facts’ about the past are fixed and beyond our control, whereas the ‘soft facts’ about the past needn’t be. A substantial literature arose in connection with this distinction, though no consensus emerged as to the proper way to analyze it. It is time, I believe, to revisit these issues. The central claim of this paper is that the attempts to analyze the hard/soft fact distinction got off on fundamentally the wrong track. The crucial feature of soft facts is that they (in some sense) depend on the future. Following recent work on the notion of dependence, however, I argue that the literature on the soft/hard distinction has failed to capture the sense of dependence at stake. This is because such attempts have tried to capture softness in terms of purely modal notions like entailment and necessitation. As I hope to show, however, such notions cannot capture the sort of asymmetrical dependence relevant to soft facthood. Arguing for this claim is the first goal of this paper. My second goal is to gesture towards what an adequate account of soft facthood will really look like.
- Adams, M. M. (1967). Is the existence of god a ‘hard’ fact? The Philosophical Review, 76, 492–503. (Reprinted in Fischer (1989), pp. 74–85).
- Correia, F. (2005). Existential dependence and cognate notions. München: Philosophia Verlag.
- Earman, J. (1986). A primer on determinism. Dordrecht: Reidel. CrossRef
- Fine, K. (1995). Ontological dependence. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 95, 269–290.
- Fischer, J. M. (Ed.). (1989). God, foreknowledge, and freedom. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
- Fischer, J. M. (1994). The metaphysics of free will: An essay on control. Oxford: Blackwell.
- Fischer, J. M., & Todd, P. (2011). The truth about freedom: A reply to Merricks. The Philosophical Review, 120, 97–115. CrossRef
- Freddoso, A. (1983). Accidental necessity and logical determinism. Journal of Philosophy, 80, 257–278. (Reprinted in Fischer (1989), pp. 136–158).
- Ginet, C. (1990). On action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossRef
- Hasker, W. (1988). Hard facts and theological fatalism. Nous, 22, 419–436. (Reprinted in Fischer (1989), pp. 159–177).
- Hoefer, C. (2010). Causal determinism. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Spring 2010 Edition), in press. http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2010/entries/determinism-causal/.
- Hoffman, J., & Rosenkrantz, G. (1984). Hard and soft facts. The Philosophical Review, 93, 419–434. (Reprinted in Fischer (1989), pp. 123–135).
- Kvanvig, J. (1986). The possibility of an all-knowing god. London: Macmillan.
- Langton, R., & Lewis, D. (1998). Defining intrinsic. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 58, 333–345. CrossRef
- Lewis, D. (1983). Extrinsic properties. Philosophical Studies, 44, 197–200. CrossRef
- Lowe, J. E. (1998). The possibility of metaphysics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Lowe, J. E. (2006). The four-category ontology: A metaphysical foundation for natural science. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Merricks, T. (2009). Truth and freedom. The Philosophical Review, 118, 29–57. CrossRef
- Merricks, T. (2011). Foreknowledge and freedom. The Philosophical Review, 120, 567–586. CrossRef
- Pike, N. (1965). Divine omniscience and voluntary action. The Philosophical Review, 74, 27–46. (Reprinted in Fischer J. M. (Ed.). (1989), pp. 57–73).
- Pike, N. (1977). Divine foreknowledge, human freedom, and possible worlds. The Philosophical Review, 86, 209–216. CrossRef
- Pike, N. (1993). A latter-day look at the foreknowledge problem. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion, 33, 129–164. CrossRef
- Plantinga, A. (1986). On Ockham’s way out. Faith and Philosophy, 3, 235–269. (Reprinted in Fischer (1989), pp. 178–215).
- Schaffer, J. (2009). On what grounds what. In D. Manley, D. J. Chalmers, & R. Wasserman (Eds.), Metametaphysics: New essays on the foundations of ontology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- van Inwagen, P. (1983). An essay on free will. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- van Inwagen, P. (2008). What does an omniscient being know about the future. In J. Kvanvig (Ed.), Oxford studies in philosophy of religion (Vol. 1). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Widerker, D. (1990). Troubles with Ockhamism. Journal of Philosophy, 87, 462–480. CrossRef
- Zagzebski, L. (1991). The dilemma of freedom and foreknowledge. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Zemach, E., & Widerker, D. (1988). Facts, freedom, and foreknowledge. Religious Studies, 23, 19–28. (Reprinted in Fischer (1989), pp. 111–122).
- Soft facts and ontological dependence
Volume 164, Issue 3 , pp 829-844
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Springer Netherlands
- Additional Links
- Free will
- Ontological dependence
- Patrick Todd (1)
- Author Affiliations
- 1. Institut für Christliche Philosophie, Universität Innsbruck, Karl-Rahner-Platz 1, 6020, Innsbruck, Austria