David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 74 (1):143-161 (2000)
[Stephen Makin] Aristotle draws two sets of distinctions in Metaphysics 9.2, first between non-rational and rational capacities, and second between one way and two way capacities. He then argues for three claims: [A] if a capacity is rational, then it is a two way capacity [B] if a capacity is non-rational, then it is a one way capacity [C] a two way capacity is not indifferently related to the opposed outcomes to which it can give rise I provide explanations of Aristotle's terminology, and of how [A]-[C] should be understood. I then offer a set of arguments which are intended to show that the Aristotelian claims are plausible. \\\ [Nicholas Denyer] In De Caelo 1: 11-12 Aristotle argued that whatever is and always will be true is necessarily true. His argument works, once we grant him the highly plausible principle that if something is true, then it can be false if and only if it can come to be false. For example, assume it true that the sun is and always will be hot. No proposition of this form can ever come to be false. Hence this proposition cannot be false. Hence it is necessarily true, and so too is anything that follows from it. In particular, it is necessarily true that the sun is hot. Moreover, if the sun not only is and always will be hot, but also always has been, then it follows by similar reasoning that the sun not only cannot now fail to be hot, but also never could have failed. Anything everlastingly true is therefore, in the strictest sense of the term, necessarily true
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Stephen Makin (2000). Aristotle on Modality, I. Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 74 (1):143–161.
Nicholas Denyer (2000). Aristotle on Modality, II. Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 74 (1):163–178.
Stephen Makin (1999). Aristotle's Two Modal Theses Again. Phronesis 44 (2):114 - 126.
Stephen Makin (1999). Aristotle's Two Modal Theses Again. Phronesis 44 (2):114-126.
Theodore Sider (2003). Reductive Theories of Modality. In Michael J. Loux & Dean W. Zimmerman (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Metaphysics. Oxford University Press. 180-208.
Stephen Makin (ed.) (2006). Aristotle: Metaphysics Theta: Translated with an Introduction and Commentary. Clarendon Press.
Jay Garfield (2009). Mmountains Are Just Mountains. In Mario D'Amato, Jay L. Garfield & Tom J. F. Tillemans (eds.), Pointing at the Moon: Buddhism, Logic, Analytic Philosophy. Oxford University Press. 71--82.
Alex Blum (2011). The Force of Truth. Philosophical Investigations 34 (4):393-395.
Ernest Sosa (1969). Propositional Knowledge. Philosophical Studies 20 (3):33 - 43.
Pavel Gregorić & Filip Grgić (2006). Aristotle's Notion of Experience. Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 88 (1):1-30.
Simo Knuuttila (2010). Medieval Commentators on Future Contingents in De Interpretatione. Vivarium 48 (1-2):75-95.
Stephen Makin (2009). Aristotle : Form, Matter, and Substance. In Robin Le Poidevin (ed.), The Routledge Companion to Metaphysics. Routledge.
Added to index2010-09-13
Total downloads10 ( #154,106 of 1,101,896 )
Recent downloads (6 months)6 ( #52,459 of 1,101,896 )
How can I increase my downloads?