Counterfactual reasoning within physical theories

If one is interested in reasoning counterfactually within a physical theory, one cannot adequately use the standard possible world semantics. As developed by Lewis and others, this semantics depends on entertaining possible worlds with miracles, worlds in which laws of nature, as described by physic...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Synthese (Dordrecht) 2021-07, Vol.198 (S16), p.S3877-S3898
1. Verfasser: Fletcher, Samuel C.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page S3898
container_issue S16
container_start_page S3877
container_title Synthese (Dordrecht)
container_volume 198
creator Fletcher, Samuel C.
description If one is interested in reasoning counterfactually within a physical theory, one cannot adequately use the standard possible world semantics. As developed by Lewis and others, this semantics depends on entertaining possible worlds with miracles, worlds in which laws of nature, as described by physical theory, are violated. Van Fraassen suggested instead to use the models of a theory as worlds, but gave up on determining the needed comparative similarity relation for the semantics objectively. I present a third way, in which this similarity relation is determined from properties of the models contextually relevant to the truth of the counterfactual under evaluation. After illustrating this with a simple example from thermodynamics, I draw some implications for future work, including a renewed possibility for a viable deflationary account of laws of nature.
doi_str_mv 10.1007/s11229-019-02085-0
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2551411284</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>27293916</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>27293916</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c369t-7f6341e045cbbacd0101af3488cd61598e00ea4f72c4dba33849eb3a422998363</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kM1LAzEQxYMoWKv_gCAUPEdn8rXJUYpfUPCi55BNs-2WuqnJLtL_3uiK3noY5jDvveH9CLlEuEGA6jYjMmYoYBkGWlI4IhOUFadglDgmEwBuaKVldUrOct4AICoBE4LzOHR9SI3z_eC2sxRcjl3brWafbb9uu9luvc-tL5d-HWJqQz4nJ43b5nDxu6fk7eH-df5EFy-Pz_O7BfVcmZ5WjeICAwjp69r5JSCga7jQ2i8VSqMDQHCiqZgXy9pxroUJNXei9DCaKz4l12PuLsWPIeTebuKQuvLSMilRlMZaHFShUlorKXVRsVHlU8w5hcbuUvvu0t4i2G-AdgRoC0D7A9BCMfHRlIu4W4X0H33QdTW6NrmP6e8Pq5jhBhX_AjVxeyk</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2166886558</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Counterfactual reasoning within physical theories</title><source>SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings</source><creator>Fletcher, Samuel C.</creator><creatorcontrib>Fletcher, Samuel C.</creatorcontrib><description>If one is interested in reasoning counterfactually within a physical theory, one cannot adequately use the standard possible world semantics. As developed by Lewis and others, this semantics depends on entertaining possible worlds with miracles, worlds in which laws of nature, as described by physical theory, are violated. Van Fraassen suggested instead to use the models of a theory as worlds, but gave up on determining the needed comparative similarity relation for the semantics objectively. I present a third way, in which this similarity relation is determined from properties of the models contextually relevant to the truth of the counterfactual under evaluation. After illustrating this with a simple example from thermodynamics, I draw some implications for future work, including a renewed possibility for a viable deflationary account of laws of nature.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0039-7857</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1573-0964</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s11229-019-02085-0</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Dordrecht: Springer Science + Business Media</publisher><subject>Cognition &amp; reasoning ; Contextualism ; Education ; Epistemology ; Logic ; Metaphysics ; Natural law ; Nature ; Philosophy ; Philosophy of Language ; Philosophy of Science ; Reasoning ; S.I.: REASONING IN PHYSICS ; Semantics ; Theory ; Truth</subject><ispartof>Synthese (Dordrecht), 2021-07, Vol.198 (S16), p.S3877-S3898</ispartof><rights>Springer Nature B.V. 2019</rights><rights>Synthese is a copyright of Springer, (2019). All Rights Reserved.</rights><rights>Springer Nature B.V. 2019.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c369t-7f6341e045cbbacd0101af3488cd61598e00ea4f72c4dba33849eb3a422998363</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c369t-7f6341e045cbbacd0101af3488cd61598e00ea4f72c4dba33849eb3a422998363</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-9061-8976</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s11229-019-02085-0$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11229-019-02085-0$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27903,27904,41467,42536,51297</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Fletcher, Samuel C.</creatorcontrib><title>Counterfactual reasoning within physical theories</title><title>Synthese (Dordrecht)</title><addtitle>Synthese</addtitle><description>If one is interested in reasoning counterfactually within a physical theory, one cannot adequately use the standard possible world semantics. As developed by Lewis and others, this semantics depends on entertaining possible worlds with miracles, worlds in which laws of nature, as described by physical theory, are violated. Van Fraassen suggested instead to use the models of a theory as worlds, but gave up on determining the needed comparative similarity relation for the semantics objectively. I present a third way, in which this similarity relation is determined from properties of the models contextually relevant to the truth of the counterfactual under evaluation. After illustrating this with a simple example from thermodynamics, I draw some implications for future work, including a renewed possibility for a viable deflationary account of laws of nature.</description><subject>Cognition &amp; reasoning</subject><subject>Contextualism</subject><subject>Education</subject><subject>Epistemology</subject><subject>Logic</subject><subject>Metaphysics</subject><subject>Natural law</subject><subject>Nature</subject><subject>Philosophy</subject><subject>Philosophy of Language</subject><subject>Philosophy of Science</subject><subject>Reasoning</subject><subject>S.I.: REASONING IN PHYSICS</subject><subject>Semantics</subject><subject>Theory</subject><subject>Truth</subject><issn>0039-7857</issn><issn>1573-0964</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AIMQZ</sourceid><sourceid>AVQMV</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>K50</sourceid><sourceid>M1D</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kM1LAzEQxYMoWKv_gCAUPEdn8rXJUYpfUPCi55BNs-2WuqnJLtL_3uiK3noY5jDvveH9CLlEuEGA6jYjMmYoYBkGWlI4IhOUFadglDgmEwBuaKVldUrOct4AICoBE4LzOHR9SI3z_eC2sxRcjl3brWafbb9uu9luvc-tL5d-HWJqQz4nJ43b5nDxu6fk7eH-df5EFy-Pz_O7BfVcmZ5WjeICAwjp69r5JSCga7jQ2i8VSqMDQHCiqZgXy9pxroUJNXei9DCaKz4l12PuLsWPIeTebuKQuvLSMilRlMZaHFShUlorKXVRsVHlU8w5hcbuUvvu0t4i2G-AdgRoC0D7A9BCMfHRlIu4W4X0H33QdTW6NrmP6e8Pq5jhBhX_AjVxeyk</recordid><startdate>20210701</startdate><enddate>20210701</enddate><creator>Fletcher, Samuel C.</creator><general>Springer Science + Business Media</general><general>Springer Netherlands</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>AABKS</scope><scope>ABSDQ</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AIMQZ</scope><scope>AVQMV</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>GB0</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>K50</scope><scope>LIQON</scope><scope>M1D</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9061-8976</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20210701</creationdate><title>Counterfactual reasoning within physical theories</title><author>Fletcher, Samuel C.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c369t-7f6341e045cbbacd0101af3488cd61598e00ea4f72c4dba33849eb3a422998363</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Cognition &amp; reasoning</topic><topic>Contextualism</topic><topic>Education</topic><topic>Epistemology</topic><topic>Logic</topic><topic>Metaphysics</topic><topic>Natural law</topic><topic>Nature</topic><topic>Philosophy</topic><topic>Philosophy of Language</topic><topic>Philosophy of Science</topic><topic>Reasoning</topic><topic>S.I.: REASONING IN PHYSICS</topic><topic>Semantics</topic><topic>Theory</topic><topic>Truth</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Fletcher, Samuel C.</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Philosophy Collection</collection><collection>Philosophy Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest One Literature</collection><collection>Arts Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>DELNET Social Sciences &amp; Humanities Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>Art, Design &amp; Architecture Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Literature - U.S. Customers Only</collection><collection>Arts &amp; Humanities Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><jtitle>Synthese (Dordrecht)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Fletcher, Samuel C.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Counterfactual reasoning within physical theories</atitle><jtitle>Synthese (Dordrecht)</jtitle><stitle>Synthese</stitle><date>2021-07-01</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>198</volume><issue>S16</issue><spage>S3877</spage><epage>S3898</epage><pages>S3877-S3898</pages><issn>0039-7857</issn><eissn>1573-0964</eissn><abstract>If one is interested in reasoning counterfactually within a physical theory, one cannot adequately use the standard possible world semantics. As developed by Lewis and others, this semantics depends on entertaining possible worlds with miracles, worlds in which laws of nature, as described by physical theory, are violated. Van Fraassen suggested instead to use the models of a theory as worlds, but gave up on determining the needed comparative similarity relation for the semantics objectively. I present a third way, in which this similarity relation is determined from properties of the models contextually relevant to the truth of the counterfactual under evaluation. After illustrating this with a simple example from thermodynamics, I draw some implications for future work, including a renewed possibility for a viable deflationary account of laws of nature.</abstract><cop>Dordrecht</cop><pub>Springer Science + Business Media</pub><doi>10.1007/s11229-019-02085-0</doi><tpages>22</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9061-8976</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0039-7857
ispartof Synthese (Dordrecht), 2021-07, Vol.198 (S16), p.S3877-S3898
issn 0039-7857
1573-0964
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2551411284
source SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings
subjects Cognition & reasoning
Contextualism
Education
Epistemology
Logic
Metaphysics
Natural law
Nature
Philosophy
Philosophy of Language
Philosophy of Science
Reasoning
S.I.: REASONING IN PHYSICS
Semantics
Theory
Truth
title Counterfactual reasoning within physical theories
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-25T21%3A02%3A27IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Counterfactual%20reasoning%20within%20physical%20theories&rft.jtitle=Synthese%20(Dordrecht)&rft.au=Fletcher,%20Samuel%20C.&rft.date=2021-07-01&rft.volume=198&rft.issue=S16&rft.spage=S3877&rft.epage=S3898&rft.pages=S3877-S3898&rft.issn=0039-7857&rft.eissn=1573-0964&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s11229-019-02085-0&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E27293916%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2166886558&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=27293916&rfr_iscdi=true