No, you have the burden of showing what possible worlds could possibly mean outside a real biological setting.
Cooper shows that logical laws are dependent on which population model they refer to. Of course that goes for the notion of possibility also... LN -----Ursprungligt meddelande----- Från: everything-list@googlegroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] För 1Z Skickat: den 8 juli 2006 22:38 Till: Everything List Ämne: Re: Only logic is necessary? Brent Meeker wrote: > Bruno Marchal wrote: > > Le 05-juil.-06, à 15:55, Lennart Nilsson a écrit : > > > > > >>William S. Cooper says: "The absolutist outlook has it that if a logic > >>is valid at all it is valid period. A sound logic is completely sound > >>everywhere and for everyone, no exceptions! For absolutist logicians a > >>logical truth is regarded as 'true in all possible worlds', making > >>logical laws constant, timeless and universal." Of course "logical laws are true in all logically possible worlds" is a (logical) tautology. An "X-possible world" is just a hypothetical state of affairs that does not contradict X-rules (X is usually logic or physics). > >>Where do the laws of logic come from? he asks the absolutist. > >>Bruno First you have to ask if they could possibly have been different. Then you have to ask what notion of possibility you are appealling to... --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
