Do modal statements about necessity express essential properties of the entities they name or are they merely descriptions of properties entities logically possess under a specific context?
>>24989783You talk like a fag and your shits all retarded
>>24989840Can you please just let me know whether I should accept a descriptivist or essentialist account of modality?
>>24989783Yes.
>>24989783Your question is too high IQ for this board.
Can someone tell this 16 yr old that he can just ask “are definitions real or made up?” like a normal adult.
Suppose we were given the proposition "Sneed's is formerly Chuck's". Now we know that Feed and Seed is Sneed's, seeing that I now choose to substitute Sneed's with a name, let's call it "Chuck's". I now find myself with the proposition "Feed and Seed is necessarily formerly Chuck's". This seems to create difficulties, because when read de re it would suggest that Feed and Seed could never be any different than it is, that it MUST have the essential property of being Formerly Chuck's. But this seems to go against our intuition that Seed and Feed is a contingent fact, not a necessary fact. So can we really say that the Sneed's has the essential feature of being Formerly Chuck's? Or does it entirely depend on context and how we name things?
>>24989783There is no single agreed answer, but the options are clear:If you are an essentialist:Some modal statements genuinely express essential features of entities themselves.If you are a deflationist or conventionalist:Modal statements describe what follows given a framework, not what entities are in themselves.If you are a hybrid:Modal discourse ranges over both, and careful metaphysics is needed to sort them.Your question ultimately asks whether modality is ontologically revealing or merely inferentially convenient. Different traditions answer that differently, and the disagreement goes all the way down.
>>24990257This reads like a diplomatic summary bot
>>24990257Thanks. I'm currently reading through Plantigna's book on this and I plan on reading Naming and Necessity too eventually. From what I am gathering they take an essentialist position. What books offer alternatives and how can I explore this discussion further? I want to understand this debate more in-depth, especially in the context of philosophical logic.
>>24990227Thanks for copy pastaing me haha. Sorry I think I mean de dicto rather than de re in that latter part too. Still trying to grasp this discussion in its full depth. I wonder how this might relate to more primitive notions of essence, especially as expressed by Aristotle too. I hope I can have a coherent metaphysics. I am currently trying to investigate the nature of reality.
>>24990304OP here. As I understand the discussion is about whether or not names are really just covert descriptions of things. Accordingly, if this is the case, then a de re interpretation of modal propositions that include necessity seems to commit one to essentialism, but philosophers like Quine have argued that names and de re readings of modal propositions obscure the proposition and that, with regards to the intension of these types of sentences (hence why modal operators like box and diamond, or O and P in Deontic logics are intensional operators) they should be read de dicto.
>>24990312>>24990304>>24990297what use does of any of this have for real life? philosophy is just mental masturbation to the extreme.
>>24990297>What books offer alternatives and how can I explore this discussion further?1) Historical and Anti-Metaphysical Critiques of EssentialismTwo Dogmas of Empiricism — Willard Van Orman QuineA foundational critique of the analytic–synthetic distinction and related doctrinal bases for modal logic; Quine famously challenged the intelligibility of de re modality and thus undermined essentialist readings of modal claims. Word and Object — Willard Van Orman QuineDevelops Quine’s naturalistic philosophy of language and ontology, emphasizing extensionalism and skepticism about traditional metaphysical categories (like essential properties). 2) Linguistic and Semantic ApproachesMeaning and Necessity: A Study in Semantics and Modal Logic — Rudolf CarnapAn influential exploration of semantics and modal logic from a semantic, not metaphysical, perspective; Carnap’s approach treats modality as tied to linguistic frameworks rather than deep metaphysical essence. Philosophical Investigations — Ludwig WittgensteinNot a book on modality per se, but its ordinary-language method and critique of essentialist assumptions (e.g., “family resemblance” concepts) have been widely interpreted as embodying anti-essentialist lessons for philosophy. The New Wittgenstein (ed. Alice Crary & Rupert Read)A collection interpreting Wittgenstein as resisting traditional metaphysical theorizing, which includes anti-essentialist implications about how philosophical concepts (including modality) are framed. 3) Contextualist, Anti-Essentialist, or Skeptical Works in Metaphysics of ModalityEpistemology of Modality and Philosophical Methodology (ed. Anand Vaidya & Duško Prelević)Contains essays on modal epistemology that address skepticism about metaphysical modality and explore alternatives to traditional essentialist commitments in how we understand possibility and necessity. Ways a World Might Be: Metaphysical and Anti-Metaphysical Essays — (Robert C. Stalnaker, etc.)Includes essays on anti-essentialism (e.g. “bare particular anti-essentialism”), offering formal alternatives to essentialist underpinnings of modal semantics.
>>249902974)Alternative Modal Frameworks and LogicOn the Plurality of Worlds — David LewisNot strictly anti-essentialist in a traditional sense, but Lewis’s modal realism locates modality in a concrete web of possible worlds — often independent of essential properties of entities in our world, presenting a distinct metaphysical basis for modality. An Introduction to Non-Classical Logic — Graham PriestProvides tools to approach modal and related logics beyond classical frameworks; such systems can be used to formalize non-essentialist views of modality. 5. Primary Anti-Essentialist Sources (Classics)Even though these aren’t full books on modality, they’re classical papers you may want to read alongside broader works:W.V.O. Quine’s “Three Grades of Modal Involvement” and his early critiques of modal logic and essentialism (often collected in From a Logical Point of View). Quine’s arguments against quantified modal logic as committed to essentialism, foundational in debates about whether modal talk must assume essences. and remember, around blacks, never relax!
>>24990368>>24990371Thank you so much! I really appreciate it fren. I'm particularly interested in Graham Priest and his dialetheism so I'll certainly be taking a look at him! >>24990326I do not care about practical applications. I just want to understand the nature of reality and the truth about existence.
>>24990368>>24990371thanks, chatgpt!
>>24990419It was Grok, actually.
>>24990368>>24990371
>>24991892Based. Analytic philosophy is superior to that Continetnal bullshit.
>>24991893Leave nothing unexamined
>>24991911Only if it's not retarded. Continental philosophy is retarded. They literally think making up a bunch of random bullshit is philosophy lol. Analytic philosophy is rigorous, mathematical, logical, and scientific. Analytic philosophy seeks to discover objective truths about the world through correct reasoning. For example, it is the aim of the analytic philosopher to discover the true ethics. Imagine having an objectively verifiable ethics using logic!
>>24992892Start exploring non-idealized analytic philosophy to get a grip on continentals
modal logic is an unnecessary hack, it doesn't solve anything that second order logic can't already express, especially when we are talking about universals we can't directly observe, it gives you expressive power with non of the guarantees that your statement are meaningful
Philosophy is what happens when people become extremely afraid of death. It's cute, in a way.
>>24992892>For example, it is the aim of the analytic philosopher to discover the true ethics. Imagine having an objectively verifiable ethics using logic!Good luck, they gave up on that shit decades ago.
>>24993605Yeah sorry but continental philosophy is pretentious and for literal wordcels who couldn't do math so they think writing an essay on magic crystals or some shit makes them smart. Literally Continental Philosophers:>The simulacrum of hyperreality is the semiotic signification of a Marxist metanarrative, which, when coupled with the Phallagocentrism of Freud and Hegel, reveals the binaries of trace and deconstruction inherent in the power dominated vacuum of capitalist run societies and the benefits of lesbian dance theory.>WOOOOOAAAHHH SO DEEEP!>SO YOU MEAN TO SAY, LIKE, I EXIST, BRO? >SO YOU MEAN TO SAY, LIKE, *(puff on a joint)* THAT EXISTENCE IS LIKE MEANINGLESS AND STUFF BRO!?>WOAAAAHHHHHH SO DEEP >BRO BRO BRO DID YOU KNOW THAT, LIKE, SISYPHUS, YEAH *THAT* SISYPHUS, HAS TO, LIKE, PUSH A ROCK UPHILL FOREVER!?>WOOOOAAAHHHHH DEEEEEEEP
>>24990368Hiroshimoot needs to put in a filter that blocks AI generated text to prevent shit like this
