Graduate studies at Western
Noûs 39 (4):679–695 (2005)
|Abstract||The core idea of David Armstrong’s combinatorial theory of possibility is attractive. Rearrangement is the key to modality; possible worlds result from scrambling bits and pieces of other possible worlds. Yet I encounter great difficulty when trying to formulate the theory rigorously, and my best attempts are vulnerable to counterexamples. The Leibnizian biconditionals relate possibility and necessity to possible world and true in|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Raymond Bradley (1989). Possibility and Combinatorialism: Wittgenstein Versus Armstrong. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 19 (1):15 - 41.
Jonathan D. Jacobs (2010). A Powers Theory of Modality: Or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Reject Possible Worlds. [REVIEW] Philosophical Studies 151 (2):227-248.
Javier Kalhat (2011). Is There A Quasi-Mereological Account of Property Incompatibility? Acta Analytica 26 (2):115-133.
Jaegwon Kim (1986). Possible Worlds and Armstrong's Combinatorialism. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 16 (4):595 - 612.
Javier Kalhat (2008). A Critique of Armstrong's Truthmaking Account of Possibility. Acta Analytica 23 (2):161-176.
D. M. Armstrong (1989). A Combinatorial Theory of Possibility. Cambridge University Press.
Daniel von Wachter (2004). The Ontological Turn Misunderstood: How to Misunderstand David Armstrong’s Theory of Possibility. Metaphysica 5:105-114.
Susan Schneider (2001). Alien Individuals, Alien Universals, and Armstrong'scombinatorial Theory of Possibility. Southern Journal of Philosophy 39 (4):575-593.
David Efird & Tom Stoneham (2006). Combinatorialism and the Possibility of Nothing. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 84 (2):269 – 280.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads37 ( #36,967 of 722,946 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,087 of 722,946 )
How can I increase my downloads?