Abstract
Within philosophy, the word “possible” is generally used to speak about either of the following. (1) Possibility: the notion that is expressed by sentences such as “It is possible that there are green cats,” “She may become the best surgeon in the city,” and “Our team can win the race.” Among the features of possibility, three are of particular interest to philosophers: it is closely related with necessity, contingency, and actuality; it is not unified, but comes in multiple varieties; it is intuitively linked to conceivability. (2) The possible: the target of sentences expressing a possibility, i.e., whatever is possible. Philosophical inquiry is notably interested in the existence and the nature of possible things. For those who think possible things exist, the challenge is to say how and where. For those who think possible things do not exist, the challenge is to say how sentences stating a possibility can be true.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Adams, R. M. (1974). Theories of actuality. Noûs, 8(3), 211–231. https://doi.org/10.2307/2214751.
Brown, M. A. (1988). On the logic of ability. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 17(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00249673.
Carnap, R. (1947). Meaning and necessity: A study in semantics and modal logic. University of Chicago Press.
Chalmers, D. J. (2002). Does conceivability entail possibility? In T. Gendler & J. Hawthorne (Eds.), Conceivability and possibility (pp. 145–200). Clarendon Press.
Chalmers, D. J. (2003). Consciousness and its place in nature. In S. P. Stich & T. A. Warfield (Eds.), The Blackwell guide to philosophy of mind (pp. 102–142). Blackwell.
Ellis, B. (1999). Causal powers and laws of nature. In H. Sankey (Ed.), Causation and laws of nature (pp. 19–34). Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-9229-1_2.
Fine, K. (1994). Essence and modality. Philosophical Perspectives, 8, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.2307/2214160.
Gendler, T., & Hawthorne, J. (2002). Introduction: Conceivability and possibility. In T. Gendler & J. Hawthorne (Eds.), Conceivability and possibility (pp. 1–70). Clarendon Press.
Graham, A. (2015). From four- to five-dimensionalism. Ratio, 28(1), 14–28. https://doi.org/10.1111/rati.12049.
Kripke, S. A. (1980). Naming and necessity. Harvard University Press.
Lewis, D. K. (1968). Counterpart theory and quantified modal logic. Journal of Philosophy, 65(5), 113–126. https://doi.org/10.2307/2024555.
Lewis, D. K. (1970). Anselm and actuality. Noûs, 4(2), 175–188. https://doi.org/10.2307/2214320.
Lewis, D. K. (1973). Counterfactuals. Blackwell.
Lewis, D. K. (1986). On the plurality of worlds. Blackwell.
Linsky, B., & Zalta, E. N. (1994). In defense of the simplest quantified modal logic. Philosophical Perspectives, 8(Logic and Language), 431–458. https://doi.org/10.2307/2214181.
Shoemaker, S. (1998). Causal and metaphysical necessity. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly, 79(1), 59–77. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0114.00050.
Van Cleve, J. (1983). Conceivability and the cartesian argument for dualism. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly, 64(1), 35–45. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0114.1983.tb00182.x.
von Wright, G. H. (1951). Deontic logic. Mind, 60(237), 1–15.
Williamson, T. (1998). Bare possibilia. Erkenntnis, 48(2/3), 257–273. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005331819843.
Williamson, T. (2013). Modal logic as metaphysics. Oxford University Press.
Yablo, S. (1993). Is conceivability a guide to possibility? Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 53(1), 1–42. https://doi.org/10.2307/2108052.
Yagisawa, T. (2010). Worlds and individuals, possible and otherwise. Oxford University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Section Editor information
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2022 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this entry
Cite this entry
Taillard, A. (2022). Possible in Philosophy. In: Glăveanu, V.P. (eds) The Palgrave Encyclopedia of the Possible. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-90913-0_136
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-90913-0_136
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-90912-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-90913-0
eBook Packages: Behavioral Science and PsychologyReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences