A puzzle for modal realism

Research output: Journal PublicationsJournal Article (refereed)

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Modal realists face a puzzle. For modal realism to be justified, modal realists need to be able to give a successful reduction of modality. A simple argument, however, appears to show that the reduction they propose fails. In order to defend the claim that modal realism is justified, modal realists therefore need to either show that this argument fails, or show that modal realists can give another reduction of modality that is successful. I argue that modal realists cannot do either of these things and that, as a result, modal realism is unjustified and should be rejected.
Original languageEnglish
Article number19
Pages (from-to)1-24
Number of pages24
JournalPhilosophers' Imprint
Volume16
Publication statusPublished - Nov 2016

Fingerprint

Realist
Modal Realism
Modality

Cite this

@article{2481127418684078b80190a558fd597c,
title = "A puzzle for modal realism",
abstract = "Modal realists face a puzzle. For modal realism to be justified, modal realists need to be able to give a successful reduction of modality. A simple argument, however, appears to show that the reduction they propose fails. In order to defend the claim that modal realism is justified, modal realists therefore need to either show that this argument fails, or show that modal realists can give another reduction of modality that is successful. I argue that modal realists cannot do either of these things and that, as a result, modal realism is unjustified and should be rejected.",
author = "MARSHALL, {Daniel Graham}",
year = "2016",
month = "11",
language = "English",
volume = "16",
pages = "1--24",
journal = "Philosophers Imprint",
issn = "1533-628X",
publisher = "University of Michigan Press",

}

A puzzle for modal realism. / MARSHALL, Daniel Graham.

In: Philosophers' Imprint, Vol. 16, 19, 11.2016, p. 1-24.

Research output: Journal PublicationsJournal Article (refereed)

TY - JOUR

T1 - A puzzle for modal realism

AU - MARSHALL, Daniel Graham

PY - 2016/11

Y1 - 2016/11

N2 - Modal realists face a puzzle. For modal realism to be justified, modal realists need to be able to give a successful reduction of modality. A simple argument, however, appears to show that the reduction they propose fails. In order to defend the claim that modal realism is justified, modal realists therefore need to either show that this argument fails, or show that modal realists can give another reduction of modality that is successful. I argue that modal realists cannot do either of these things and that, as a result, modal realism is unjustified and should be rejected.

AB - Modal realists face a puzzle. For modal realism to be justified, modal realists need to be able to give a successful reduction of modality. A simple argument, however, appears to show that the reduction they propose fails. In order to defend the claim that modal realism is justified, modal realists therefore need to either show that this argument fails, or show that modal realists can give another reduction of modality that is successful. I argue that modal realists cannot do either of these things and that, as a result, modal realism is unjustified and should be rejected.

UR - http://commons.ln.edu.hk/sw_master/6122

UR - https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-84997522775&partnerID=40&md5=868dac44c7cad9c95aa087d6b74057c5

M3 - Journal Article (refereed)

VL - 16

SP - 1

EP - 24

JO - Philosophers Imprint

JF - Philosophers Imprint

SN - 1533-628X

M1 - 19

ER -