New foundations for counterfactuals

7Citations
Citations of this article
13Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Philosophers typically rely on intuitions when providing a semantics for counterfactual conditionals. However, intuitions regarding counterfactual conditionals are notoriously shaky. The aim of this paper is to provide a principled account of the semantics of counterfactual conditionals. This principled account is provided by what I dub the Royal Rule, a deterministic analogue of the Principal Principle relating chance and credence. The Royal Rule says that an ideal doxastic agent’s initial grade of disbelief in a proposition $$A$$A, given that the counterfactual distance in a given context to the closest $$A$$A-worlds equals $$n$$n, and no further information that is not admissible in this context, should equal $$n$$n. Under the two assumptions that the presuppositions of a given context are admissible in this context, and that the theory of deterministic alethic or metaphysical modality is admissible in any context, it follows that the counterfactual distance distribution in a given context has the structure of a ranking function. The basic conditional logic V is shown to be sound and complete with respect to the resulting rank-theoretic semantics of counterfactuals.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Huber, F. (2014). New foundations for counterfactuals. Synthese, 191(10), 2167–2193. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-013-0391-0

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free