Defending Conditional Excluded Middle

Noûs 44 (4):650-668 (2010)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
Lewis (1973) gave a short argument against conditional excluded middle, based on his treatment of ‘might’ counterfactuals. Bennett (2003), with much of the recent literature, gives an alternative take on ‘might’ counterfactuals. But Bennett claims the might-argument against CEM still goes through. This turns on a specific claim I call Bennett’s Hypothesis. I argue that independently of issues to do with the proper analysis of might-counterfactuals, Bennett’s Hypothesis is inconsistent with CEM. But Bennett’s Hypothesis is independently objectionable, so we should resolve this tension by dropping the Hypothesis, not by dropping CEM
Keywords
No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories
(categorize this paper)
PhilPapers/Archive ID
WILDCE
Upload history
Archival date: 2018-11-02
View other versions
Added to PP index
2009-01-28

Total views
266 ( #17,987 of 53,012 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
23 ( #27,286 of 53,012 )

How can I increase my downloads?

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