Knowledge

Metaphysical necessity

Source 📝

133:: "There is no object, which implies the existence of any other if we consider these objects in themselves". Hume's intuition motivating this thesis is that while experience presents us with certain ideas of various objects, it might as well have presented us with very different ideas. So when I perceive a bird on a tree, I might as well have perceived a bird without a tree or a tree without a bird. This is so because their 157:
worlds with the throwing-event also contain a subsequent dissolving-event. But the two events are distinct entities, so according to Hume's dictum, it is possible to have one event without the other. An even wider application is to use Hume's dictum as an axiom of modality to determine which propositions or worlds are possible based on the notion of recombination.
156:
are necessary, i.e. are the same in all possible worlds. To see how this might work, consider the case of salt being thrown into a cup of water and subsequently dissolving. This can be described as a series of two events, a throwing-event and a dissolving-event. Necessitarians hold that all possible
51:
necessity is necessity according to the laws of physics and logical necessity is necessity according to the laws of logic, while metaphysical necessities are necessary in the sense that the world could not possibly have been otherwise. What facts are metaphysically necessary, and on what basis we
163:
likewise critiqued the notion of 'metaphysical neccessity' writing that "the sun will rise to-morrow, is an hypothesis; and that means that we do not know whether it will rise. A necessity for one thing to happen because another has happened does not exist. There is only logical necessity".
223:
argues that God is a causally necessary being. Because a factually or causally necessary being does not exist by logical necessity, it does not exist in all logically possible worlds. Therefore, Swinburne used the term "ultimate brute fact" for the existence of God.
106:
causal necessity (subsumed by Hick under the former type): a causally necessary being is such that it is logically impossible for it to be causally dependent on any other being, and it is logically impossible for any other being to be causally independent of
39:(or physical) necessity, in the sense that logical necessity entails metaphysical necessity, but not vice versa, and metaphysical necessity entails physical necessity, but not vice versa. A 145:: "anything can coexist with anything else, at least provided they occupy distinct spatiotemporal positions. Likewise, anything can fail to coexist with anything else". 113:: a logically necessary being is a being whose non-existence is a logical impossibility, and which therefore exists either timeless or eternally in all possible worlds. 103:
factual necessity (existential necessity): a factually necessary being is not causally dependent on any other being, while any other being is causally dependent on it.
52:
might view certain facts as metaphysically but not logically necessary are subjects of substantial discussion in contemporary philosophy.
486: 387: 331: 618: 607: 644: 359: 458: 282: 243: 91:
Metaphysical necessity is contrasted with other types of necessity. For example, the philosophers of religion
125:
is a thesis about necessary connections between distinct entities. Its original formulation can be found in
415: 649: 130: 152:. It can be used, for example, as an argument against nomological necessitarianism, the view that the 248: 138: 551: 153: 204: 177: 60: 8: 325: 160: 64: 634: 593: 480: 381: 508: 63:, but metaphysical necessity is also one of the central concepts in late 20th century 278: 216: 212: 80: 208: 639: 450: 56: 55:
The concept of a metaphysically necessary being plays an important role in certain
220: 96: 67:. Metaphysical necessity has proved a controversial concept, and criticized by 32: 628: 110: 72: 454: 187: 76: 238: 182: 149: 40: 36: 597: 126: 68: 20: 479:
Gibbs, Cameron (2019). "2. CONSTRAINTS ON FORMULATING HUME'S DICTUM".
353: 215:) considered God to be a logically or metaphysically necessary being, 148:
Hume's dictum has been employed in various arguments in contemporary
92: 438: 613: 602: 48: 134: 409: 233: 380:
Gibbs, Cameron (2019). "6. THE ARGUMENT FROM PLENITUDE".
191:
truths, such as "Hesperus is Phosphoros", or "Water is H
324:
Hume, David (1739). "Book I, Part III, Section VI".
195:
O", that were nonetheless metaphysically necessary.
167: 626: 580:. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, p. 96 141:follows this line of thought in formulating his 513:. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University 531: 47:if it could not have failed to be the case. 35:, which sits between logical necessity and 198: 627: 506: 439:"Necessarily, Salt Dissolves in Water" 319: 317: 567:. Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, p. 108 478: 379: 351: 294:John Hick (1961): Necessary Being. - 86: 436: 323: 31:, is one of many different kinds of 619:Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy 608:Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy 418:from the original on 28 August 2023 314: 99:distinguished the following three: 13: 407: 219:argued for factual necessity, and 57:arguments for the existence of God 14: 661: 587: 117: 570: 557: 540: 525: 500: 489:from the original on 2023-06-26 461:from the original on 2023-06-23 390:from the original on 2023-06-26 362:from the original on 2023-06-23 358:. Wiley-Blackwell. p. 88. 334:from the original on 2023-05-11 534:Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 472: 430: 401: 373: 345: 301: 288: 267: 1: 532:Wittgenstein, Ludwig (1921). 311:. Fordham Univ Press, 273 pp. 260: 203:While many theologians (e.g. 507:Menzel, Christopher (2017). 296:Scottish Journal of Theology 137:do not depend upon another. 7: 227: 10: 666: 576:Richard Swinburne (2004): 482:A Defense of Hume's Dictum 383:A Defense of Hume's Dictum 355:On the Plurality of Worlds 327:A Treatise of Human Nature 143:principle of recombination 131:A Treatise of Human Nature 330:. The Project Gutenberg. 309:The Cosmological Argument 552:Harvard University Press 437:Bird, Alexander (2001). 307:William L. Rowe (1998): 645:Concepts in metaphysics 563:Ronald H. Nash (1983): 455:10.1111/1467-8284.00304 185:argued that there were 29:broad logical necessity 594:Metaphysical necessity 25:metaphysical necessity 352:Lewis, David (1986). 199:Necessity in theology 16:Philosophical concept 578:The Existence of God 548:Naming and Necessity 546:Kripke, Saul. 1980. 205:Anselm of Canterbury 178:Naming and Necessity 171:and necessary truths 61:ontological argument 161:Ludwig Wittgenstein 65:analytic philosophy 27:, sometimes called 565:The Concept of God 87:Types of necessity 650:Modal metaphysics 603:Modal Metaphysics 275:God and Necessity 217:Richard Swinburne 213:Gottfried Leibniz 111:logical necessity 81:Richard Swinburne 59:, especially the 657: 581: 574: 568: 561: 555: 544: 538: 537: 529: 523: 522: 520: 518: 504: 498: 497: 495: 494: 476: 470: 469: 467: 466: 434: 428: 427: 425: 423: 408:Swartz, Norman. 405: 399: 398: 396: 395: 377: 371: 370: 368: 367: 349: 343: 342: 340: 339: 321: 312: 305: 299: 298:, 1961: 353-369. 292: 286: 271: 83:, among others. 665: 664: 660: 659: 658: 656: 655: 654: 625: 624: 616:article in the 614:Modal Illusions 605:article in the 590: 585: 584: 575: 571: 562: 558: 545: 541: 530: 526: 516: 514: 510:Possible Worlds 505: 501: 492: 490: 477: 473: 464: 462: 435: 431: 421: 419: 406: 402: 393: 391: 378: 374: 365: 363: 350: 346: 337: 335: 322: 315: 306: 302: 293: 289: 285:, 9780191654879 272: 268: 263: 230: 221:Alvin Plantinga 201: 194: 173: 120: 97:William L. Rowe 89: 17: 12: 11: 5: 663: 653: 652: 647: 642: 637: 623: 622: 611: 600: 589: 588:External links 586: 583: 582: 569: 556: 539: 524: 499: 471: 449:(4): 267–274. 429: 411:Laws of Nature 400: 372: 344: 313: 300: 287: 273:Brian Leftow, 265: 264: 262: 259: 258: 257: 246: 241: 236: 229: 226: 209:René Descartes 200: 197: 192: 172: 166: 154:laws of nature 119: 116: 115: 114: 108: 104: 88: 85: 43:is said to be 15: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 662: 651: 648: 646: 643: 641: 638: 636: 633: 632: 630: 621: 620: 615: 612: 610: 609: 604: 601: 599: 595: 592: 591: 579: 573: 566: 560: 553: 549: 543: 535: 528: 512: 511: 503: 488: 484: 483: 475: 460: 456: 452: 448: 444: 440: 433: 417: 413: 412: 404: 389: 385: 384: 376: 361: 357: 356: 348: 333: 329: 328: 320: 318: 310: 304: 297: 291: 284: 280: 276: 270: 266: 256: 255: 251: 247: 245: 242: 240: 237: 235: 232: 231: 225: 222: 218: 214: 210: 206: 196: 190: 189: 184: 180: 179: 170: 165: 162: 158: 155: 151: 146: 144: 140: 136: 132: 128: 124: 123:Hume's dictum 118:Hume's dictum 112: 109: 105: 102: 101: 100: 98: 94: 84: 82: 78: 74: 73:Immanuel Kant 70: 66: 62: 58: 53: 50: 46: 42: 38: 34: 30: 26: 22: 617: 606: 577: 572: 564: 559: 547: 542: 533: 527: 515:. Retrieved 509: 502: 491:. Retrieved 481: 474: 463:. Retrieved 446: 442: 432: 420:. Retrieved 410: 403: 392:. Retrieved 382: 375: 364:. Retrieved 354: 347: 336:. Retrieved 326: 308: 303: 295: 290: 274: 269: 254:a posteriori 253: 249: 202: 188:a posteriori 186: 176: 174: 169:A posteriori 168: 159: 147: 142: 122: 121: 90: 77:J. L. Mackie 54: 44: 28: 24: 18: 517:28 November 422:28 November 239:Modal logic 183:Saul Kripke 150:metaphysics 139:David Lewis 49:Nomological 41:proposition 37:nomological 629:Categories 598:PhilPapers 493:2024-04-30 465:2024-04-30 394:2024-04-30 366:2024-04-30 338:2024-04-30 283:0191654876 261:References 127:David Hume 69:David Hume 21:philosophy 635:Necessity 244:Platonism 93:John Hick 45:necessary 33:necessity 487:Archived 459:Archived 443:Analysis 416:Archived 388:Archived 360:Archived 332:Archived 277:(2012). 250:A priori 228:See also 135:essences 640:Reality 281:  234:Ananke 211:, and 79:, and 554:: 22. 519:2020 424:2020 279:ISBN 252:and 95:and 596:at 451:doi 175:In 129:'s 107:it. 19:In 631:: 550:. 485:. 457:. 447:61 445:. 441:. 414:. 386:. 316:^ 207:, 181:, 75:, 71:, 23:, 536:. 521:. 496:. 468:. 453:: 426:. 397:. 369:. 341:. 193:2

Index

philosophy
necessity
nomological
proposition
Nomological
arguments for the existence of God
ontological argument
analytic philosophy
David Hume
Immanuel Kant
J. L. Mackie
Richard Swinburne
John Hick
William L. Rowe
logical necessity
David Hume
A Treatise of Human Nature
essences
David Lewis
metaphysics
laws of nature
Ludwig Wittgenstein
Naming and Necessity
Saul Kripke
a posteriori
Anselm of Canterbury
René Descartes
Gottfried Leibniz
Richard Swinburne
Alvin Plantinga

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.