Counterpart Theory as a Semantics for Modal Logic

  • Woollaston L
N/ACitations
Citations of this article
3Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

A claim by David K. Lewis (1986) that his counterpart theory provides a semantics for intensional languages is critiqued by showing that basic principles of modal logic fail to be valid in counterpart theory & by investigating problematic counterpart-theoretical translations of instances of universal instantiation. From Lewis's postulate that individuals inhabit only one world & have counterparts in other worlds, it follows that the relation between an object & its counterparts is nontransitive & nonsymmetric; consequently, an object does not need to have exactly one counterpart in any world. The failure of modal principles in counterpart theory is ascribed to the possibility that an object has no counterpart in a given world, whereas universal instantiation becomes invalid when an object has more than one counterpart in a given world. 3 References. Adapted from the source document

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Woollaston, L. (1994). Counterpart Theory as a Semantics for Modal Logic. Logique et Analyse, 37(147–148), 255–263. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/58322914?accountid=8330%5Cnhttp://library.anu.edu.au:4550/resserv?genre=article&issn=00245836&title=Logique+et+Analyse&volume=37&issue=147-148&date=1994-12-01&atitle=Counterpart+Theory+as+a+Semantics+for+Modal+Logic&spag

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free