Theoria 74 (4):331-351 (2008)
AbstractConditionals that contain a modality in the consequent give rise to a particular semantic phenomenon whereby the antecedent of the conditional blocks possibilities when interpreting the modality in the consequent. This explains the puzzling logical behaviour of constructions like "If you don't buy a lottery ticket, you can't win", "If you eat that poison, it is unlikely that you will survive the day" and "If you kill Harry, you ought to kill him gently". In this paper it is argued that a semantic version of the Ramsey Test provides a key in the analysis of such constructions. The logic for this semantics is axiomatized and some examples are studied, among them a well-known puzzle for contrary-to-duty obligations.
Similar books and articles
The Iffiest Oughts: A Guise of Reasons Account of End‐Given Conditionals.Matthew S. Bedke - 2009 - Ethics 119 (4):672-698.
Modalities in linear logic weaker than the exponential “of course”: Algebraic and relational semantics. [REVIEW]Anna Bucalo - 1994 - Journal of Logic, Language and Information 3 (3):211-232.
Stoic Conditionals, Necessity and Explanation.Scott Labarge - 2002 - History and Philosophy of Logic 23 (4):241-252.
The Q factor: Modal rationalism versus modal autonomism.Joseph Levine - 2010 - Philosophical Review 119 (3):365-380.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
Citations of this work
A Counterexample to Modus Tollens.Seth Yalcin - 2012 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 41 (6):1001-1024.
One's Modus Ponens: Modality, Coherence and Logic.Una Stojnić - 2017 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 95 (1):167-214.
Deliberative modality under epistemic uncertainty.Fabrizio Cariani, Magdalena Kaufmann & Stefan Kaufmann - 2013 - Linguistics and Philosophy 36 (3):225-259.
Indicative Conditionals and Graded Information.Ivano Ciardelli - 2020 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 49 (3):509-549.