Erkenntnis 70 (2):151 - 171 (2009)

Authors
Robert Williams
University of Leeds
Abstract
This paper explores the interaction of well-motivated (if controversial) principles governing the probability conditionals, with accounts of what it is for a sentence to be indefinite. The conclusion can be played in a variety of ways. It could be regarded as a new reason to be suspicious of the intuitive data about the probability of conditionals; or, holding fixed the data, it could be used to give traction on the philosophical analysis of a contentious notion—indefiniteness. The paper outlines the various options, and shows that ‘rejectionist’ theories of indefiniteness are incompatible with the results. Rejectionist theories include popular accounts such as supervaluationism, non-classical truth-value gap theories, and accounts of indeterminacy that centre on rejecting the law of excluded middle. An appendix compares the results obtained here with the ‘impossibility’ results descending from Lewis ( 1976 ).
Keywords Philosophy   Philosophy   Epistemology   Ontology   Ethics   Logic
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/s10670-008-9145-7
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

 PhilArchive page | Other versions
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Vagueness.Timothy Williamson - 1994 - Routledge.
Time and Chance.David Z. Albert - 2000 - Harvard University Press.

View all 34 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Counterfactual Triviality: A Lewis-Impossibility Argument for Counterfactuals.Robert Williams - 2012 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 85 (3):648-670.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP index
2009-01-28

Total views
185 ( #53,271 of 2,427,861 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
18 ( #41,633 of 2,427,861 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes