Are there necessary a posteriori truths?

A posteriori necessity is a thesis in metaphysics and the philosophy of language, that some statements of which we must acquire knowledge a posteriori are also necessarily true. It challenges previously widespread belief that only a priori knowledge can be necessary.

Is God a rigid designator?

Thus, given the truth of a classical tradition according to which God and entities like numbers exist and could not have failed to exist, ‘7’ or ‘God’ are “strongly rigid” in Kripke’s sense: this is a special case of obstinate rigidity. 3.

Why is identity a necessary relation?

In modal logic, the necessity of identity is the thesis that for every object x and object y, if x and y are the same object, it is necessary that x and y are the same object.

Why are true identity statements involving rigid designators necessary truths?

Kripke (1980;1971) famously argues that because a rigid designator designates the same object in all possible worlds, an identity statement in which both designators are rigid must be necessarily true if it is true at all, even if the statement is not a priori.

What is the difference between priori and posteriori?

A priori knowledge is that which is independent from experience. Examples include mathematics, tautologies, and deduction from pure reason. A posteriori knowledge is that which depends on empirical evidence. Both terms are primarily used as modifiers to the noun “knowledge” (i.e. “a priori knowledge”).

Are names rigid designators?

Kripke says that a rigid designator is a word that picks out the same thing in all possible worlds in which it designates at all. Examples of rigid designators include proper names and names of proper types.

Is pain a rigid designator?

Construed this way, the claim that ‘pain’ is a rigid designator is perfectly well defined: it is a rigid designator just in case it refers to the same property with respect to every possible world. Same goes for ‘C-fiber firing.

Why is it important to understand the nature of philosophy?

It teaches critical thinking, close reading, clear writing, and logical analysis; it uses these to understand the language we use to describe the world, and our place within it. Different areas of philosophy are distinguished by the questions they ask.

What is the problem of diachronic personal identity?

In contemporary metaphysics, the matter of personal identity is referred to as the diachronic problem of personal identity. The synchronic problem concerns the question of what features and traits characterize a person at a given time.

Can you also think of an example of a true statement that is contingent yet a priori?

Grass is green if and only if actually, grass is green. Each of these also, relative to our imagined contexts of utterance, expresses a contingent truth. So each seems to be an example of the contingent a priori.

What is contingent identity?

Contingent Identity. Wolfgang Schwarz* Australian National University. Abstract It is widely held that if an object a is identical (or non-identical) to an object b, then it is necessary that a is identical (non-identical) to b.

Is ‘Hesperus’ a rigid designator?

Third and finally, ‘Hesperus’ is rigid because it picks out Hesperus in all worlds that contain Hesperus. In worlds not containing Hesperus, the designator fails to name anything other than Hesperus. There is more than one account of a rigid designator that conforms to that requirement.

Are the designators rigid or non-rigid?

Whether a statement’s designators are rigid or non-rigid may determine whether it is necessarily true, necessarily false, or contingent. This metaphysical status is sometimes out of accord with what one would expect given a statement’s apparent epistemological status as a posteriori or a priori.

Is God a necessary being?

All time, space, and matter depend on God’s sustaining power for their existence, in every moment. These things are contingent; that is to say, they don’t have to exist, and so because they do exist, we are right to ask for the causes of their existence. But Christian theologians have understood God to be a necessary being.

Is rigidity a substantive issue?

It may be that no substantive issues ride on which conception of rigidity is adopted (Stanley 1997a, pp. 557, 566ff.; see also Brock 2004, p. 285n.13).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BD7aGvRJzaM