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...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Synthese (Dordrecht) 2021-07, Vol.198 (S16), p.S3877-S3898 |
---|---|
1. Verfasser: | |
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 & 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 & 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 & 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 & Humanities Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>Art, Design & Architecture Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Literature - U.S. Customers Only</collection><collection>Arts & 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 |