Location

University of Windsor

Document Type

Paper

Keywords

associated conditional, closest-world semantics, consequence, counter-factuals, covering generalization, David Lewis, Judea Pearl, law-like generalization, material consequence, structural model semantics

Start Date

22-5-2013 9:00 AM

End Date

25-5-2013 5:00 PM

Abstract

A conclusion is a “material consequence” of reasons if it follows necessarily from them in accordance with a valid form of argument with content. The corresponding universal generalization of the argument’s associated conditional must be true, must be a covering generalization, and must be true of counter-factual instances. But it need not be law-like. Pearl’s structural model semantics is easier to apply to such counter-factual instances than Lewis’s closest-worlds semantics, and gives intuitively correct results.

Creative Commons License

Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Included in

Philosophy Commons

Share

COinS
 
May 22nd, 9:00 AM May 25th, 5:00 PM

Material consequences and counter-factuals

University of Windsor

A conclusion is a “material consequence” of reasons if it follows necessarily from them in accordance with a valid form of argument with content. The corresponding universal generalization of the argument’s associated conditional must be true, must be a covering generalization, and must be true of counter-factual instances. But it need not be law-like. Pearl’s structural model semantics is easier to apply to such counter-factual instances than Lewis’s closest-worlds semantics, and gives intuitively correct results.