Chances, Counterfactuals, and Similarity

Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
John Hawthorne in a recent paper takes issue with Lewisian accounts of counterfactuals, when relevant laws of nature are chancy. I respond to his arguments on behalf of the Lewisian, and conclude that while some can be rebutted, the case against the original Lewisian account is strong.I develop a neo-Lewisian account of what makes for closeness of worlds. I argue that my revised version avoids Hawthorne’s challenges. I argue that this is closer to the spirit of Lewis’s first (non-chancy) proposal than is Lewis’s own suggested modification
No keywords specified (fix it)
PhilPapers/Archive ID
Revision history
Archival date: 2018-11-02
View upload history
References found in this work BETA
Counterfactuals.Lewis, David K.
Philosophical Papers.Lewis, David K.
On Conditionals.Edgington, Dorothy

View all 19 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA
Levelling counterfactual scepticism.Sandgren, Alexander & Steele, Katie

View all 21 citations / Add more citations

Added to PP index

Total views
177 ( #23,698 of 50,236 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
9 ( #42,375 of 50,236 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks to external links.