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...


-----Ursprungligt meddelande-----
[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

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at

Reply via email to