Epistemologists of modality wanted

Boardman, Samuel; Schoonen, Tom

doi:10.1007/s11229-023-04416-8

Cited by 3 publications

References 59 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

Don’t imagine junk! Positive conceivability and modal illusion in mereology

Dohrn

2024

Synthese

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is a widespread practice of using evidence obtained from conceiving/imagining for establishing possibility claims. As a case study. I offer a critical reconstruction of an influential conceivability argument, Bohn’s (Philosophical Quarterly 59:193-201, 2009a, Analysis 70:296–298, 2009b, Analysis 70:296-298, 2010) argument for junk (there are proper parts forming wholes, but there is no whole that is not a proper part itself). The most influential scenario used by Bohn and his successors is purported to be junk but not ensured to be junk. This finding calls for an explanation. I distinguish ways of conceiving/imagining that are insufficient to establish modal claims from positive conceiving/imagining, which is more promising. Positive conceiving/imagining often works by a partial structural isomorphy to its target, and it is sufficiently detailed. In order to be sufficiently detailed, it has to properly integrate theoretical considerations. I outline a concern about extant ways of conceiving/imagining junk: they do not yet include a metaphysical understanding of what it takes for there to be proper parts and wholes without a whole that is not a proper part itself, for instance in terms of a non-gerrymandered principle of composition.

show abstract

Don’t imagine junk! Positive conceivability and modal illusion in mereology

Dohrn

2024

Synthese

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Modal Naturalism

Bryant,

Wilson

2024

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

How do we know what is possible or impossible, what is inevitable or unattainable, or what would happen under which circumstances? Since modal facts seem distinctively mysterious and difficult to know, the epistemology of modality has historically been fraught with uncertainty and disagreement. The recent literature has been dominated by rationalist approaches that emphasise a priori reasoning (sometimes including direct intuition of possibility). Only recently have alternative approaches emerged which recognize a broader range of sources of modal knowledge. Yet even emerging non-rationalist views have tended to assign scientific investigation at best a supporting role. Our project in this book is to develop and defend a new approach to the epistemology of modal facts which assigns a central role to scientific investigation. According to modal naturalism, science (construed broadly) is our primary source of evidence concerning the modal facts.

show abstract

Embodied simulation and knowledge of possibilities

Jones,

Schoonen

2024

Philosophical Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Epistemologists of modality wanted

Cited by 3 publications

References 59 publications

Don’t imagine junk! Positive conceivability and modal illusion in mereology

Don’t imagine junk! Positive conceivability and modal illusion in mereology

Modal Naturalism

Embodied simulation and knowledge of possibilities

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About