Skip to main content

Relative Necessity and Propositional Quantification

Abstract

Following Smiley’s (The Journal of Symbolic Logic, 28, 113–134 1963) influential proposal, it has become standard practice to characterise notions of relative necessity in terms of simple strict conditionals. However, Humberstone (Reports on Mathematical Logic, 13, 33–42 1981) and others have highlighted various flaws with Smiley’s now standard account of relative necessity. In their recent article, Hale and Leech (Journal of Philosophical Logic, 46, 1–26 2017) propose a novel account of relative necessity designed to overcome the problems facing the standard account. Nevertheless, the current article argues that Hale & Leech’s account suffers from its own defects, some of which Hale & Leech are aware of but underplay. To supplement this criticism, the article offers an alternative account of relative necessity which overcomes these defects. This alternative account is developed in a quantified modal propositional logic and is shown model-theoretically to meet several desiderata of an account of relative necessity.

References

  1. van Benthem, J. (2010) Modal logic for open minds. CSLI Publications: Stanford.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bacon, A. (2018) The Broadest Necessity. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 47, 733–783.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Cresswell, M. (1965) Another basis for S4. Logique and Analyse, 8, 191–195.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Dorr, C. (2010) Iterating definiteness. In Dietz, R., & Moruzzi, S. (Eds.) Cuts and clouds: vagueness its nature and its logic. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  5. Fine, K. (1970) Propositional quantifiers in modal logic. Theoria, 36, 336–346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Fine, K. (1975) Vagueness, truth, and logic. Synthese, 30, 265–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Goodman, J., & Fritz, P. (2017) Counting incompossibles. Mind, 126, 1063–1108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Goranko, V., & Otto, M. (2006) Model theory of modal logic. In Blackburn, P. et al. (Eds.) Handbook of modal logic. Amsterdam: Elsevier.

  9. Hale, B. (1996) Absolute necessities. Philosophical Perspectives, 10, 93–117.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Hale, B., & Leech, J. (2017) Relative necessity reformulated. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 46, 1–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Humberstone, L. (1981) Relative necessity revisited. Reports on Mathematical Logic, 13, 33–42.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Humberstone, L. (2004) Two-dimensional adventures. Philosophical Studies, 118, 17–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. McFetridge, I. (1990) Logical necessity and other essays. London: The Aristotelian Society.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Scroggs, S.J. (1951) Extensions of the Lewis system S5. The Journal of Symbolic Logic, 16, 112–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Smiley, T. (1963) Relative necessity. The Journal of Symbolic Logic, 28, 113–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Strohminger, M., & Yli-Vakkuri, J. (2019) Knowledge of objective modality. Philosophical Studies, 176, 1155–1175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Suszko, R. (1971) Identity connective and modality. Studia Logica, 27, 7–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Williamson, T. (2013) Modal logic as metaphysics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  19. Williamson, T. (2016) Modal science. Canadian Journal of Philosophy, 46, 453–492.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

For helpful discussion and feedback, thanks are due to Arif Ahmed, Robbie Williams, Timothy Williamson, and an audience at the Twelfth Annual Cambridge Graduate Conference on the Philosophy of Mathematics and Logic, at which Arif Ahmed provided comments on the paper. Special thanks are due to James Studd for particularly helpful feedback on earlier drafts, and to two anonymous referees for this journal whose comments greatly improved the paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alexander Roberts.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Roberts, A. Relative Necessity and Propositional Quantification. J Philos Logic 49, 703–726 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10992-019-09534-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10992-019-09534-8

Keywords

  • Relative necessity
  • Absolute necessity
  • Logical necessity
  • Modal logic