Subjunctive possibility
Encyclopedia
Subjunctive possibility is the form of modality most frequently studied in modal logic
. Subjunctive possibilities are the sorts of possibilities we consider when we conceive of counterfactual situations; subjunctive modalities are modalities that bear on whether a statement might have been or could be true—such as might, could, must, possibly, necessarily, contingently, essentially, accidentally, and so on. Subjunctive possibilities include logical possibility
, metaphysical possibility, nomological possibility, and temporal possibility.
(which deals with how the world may be, for all we know) and deontic possibility (which deals with how the world ought to be).
is true or not (no-one has come up with a proof yet); so it is (epistemically) possible that it is true and it is (epistemically) possible that it is false. But if it is, in fact, provably true (as it may be, for all we know), then it would have to be (subjunctively) necessarily true; what being provable means is that it would not be (logically) possible for it to be false. Similarly, it might not be at all (epistemically) possible that it is raining outside—we might know beyond a shadow of a doubt that it is not—but that would hardly mean that it is (subjunctively) impossible for it to rain outside. This point is also made by Norman Swartz and Raymond Bradley.
Similarly David Lewis could have taken a degree in Economics but not in, say, Aviation (because it was not taught at Harvard) or Cognitive Neuroscience (because the so-called 'conceptual space' for such a major did not exist). There is some debate whether this final type of possibility in fact constitutes a type of possibility distinct from Temporal, and is sometimes called Historical Possibility by thinkers like Ian Hacking
.
Modal logic
Modal logic is a type of formal logic that extends classical propositional and predicate logic to include operators expressing modality. Modals — words that express modalities — qualify a statement. For example, the statement "John is happy" might be qualified by saying that John is...
. Subjunctive possibilities are the sorts of possibilities we consider when we conceive of counterfactual situations; subjunctive modalities are modalities that bear on whether a statement might have been or could be true—such as might, could, must, possibly, necessarily, contingently, essentially, accidentally, and so on. Subjunctive possibilities include logical possibility
Logical possibility
A logically possible proposition is one that can be asserted without implying a logical contradiction. This is to say that a proposition is logically possible if there is some coherent way for the world to be, under which the proposition would be true...
, metaphysical possibility, nomological possibility, and temporal possibility.
Subjunctive possibility and other modalities
Subjunctive possibility is contrasted with (among other things) epistemic possibilityEpistemic possibility
In philosophy and modal logic, epistemic possibility relates a statement under consideration to the current state of our knowledge about the actual world: a statement is said to be:* epistemically possible if it may be true, for all we know...
(which deals with how the world may be, for all we know) and deontic possibility (which deals with how the world ought to be).
Epistemic possibility
The contrast with epistemic possibility is especially important to draw, since in ordinary language the same phrases ("it's possible," "it can't be", "it must be") are often used to express either sort of possibility. But they are not the same. We do not know whether Goldbach's conjectureGoldbach's conjecture
Goldbach's conjecture is one of the oldest unsolved problems in number theory and in all of mathematics. It states:A Goldbach number is a number that can be expressed as the sum of two odd primes...
is true or not (no-one has come up with a proof yet); so it is (epistemically) possible that it is true and it is (epistemically) possible that it is false. But if it is, in fact, provably true (as it may be, for all we know), then it would have to be (subjunctively) necessarily true; what being provable means is that it would not be (logically) possible for it to be false. Similarly, it might not be at all (epistemically) possible that it is raining outside—we might know beyond a shadow of a doubt that it is not—but that would hardly mean that it is (subjunctively) impossible for it to rain outside. This point is also made by Norman Swartz and Raymond Bradley.
Deontic possibility
There is some overlap in language between subjunctive possibilities and deontic possibilities: for example, we sometimes use the statement "You can/cannot do that" to express (i) what it is or is not subjunctively possible for you to do, and we sometimes use it to express (ii) what it would or would not be right for you to do. The two are less likely to be confused in ordinary language than subjunctive and epistemic possibility as there are some important differences in the logic of subjunctive modalities and deontic modalities. In particular, subjunctive necessity entails truth: if people logically must such and such, then you can infer that they actually do it. But in this non-ideal world, a deontic ‘must’ does not carry the moral certitude that people morally must do such and such.Types of subjunctive possibility
There are several different types of subjunctive modality, which can be classified as broader or more narrow than one another depending on how restrictive the rules for what counts as "possible" are. Some of the most commonly discussed are:- Logical possibilityLogical possibilityA logically possible proposition is one that can be asserted without implying a logical contradiction. This is to say that a proposition is logically possible if there is some coherent way for the world to be, under which the proposition would be true...
is usually considered the broadest sort of possibility; a proposition is said to be logically possible if there is no logical contradiction involved in its being true. "Dick CheneyDick CheneyRichard Bruce "Dick" Cheney served as the 46th Vice President of the United States , under George W. Bush....
is a bachelor" is logically possible, though in fact false; most philosophers have thought that statements like "If I flap my arms very hard, I will fly" are logically possible, although they are nomologically impossible. "Dick CheneyDick CheneyRichard Bruce "Dick" Cheney served as the 46th Vice President of the United States , under George W. Bush....
is a married bachelor," on the other hand, is logically impossible; anyone who is a bachelor is therefore not married, so the sentence involves a logical contradiction.
- Metaphysical possibility is either equivalent to logical possibility or narrower than it (what a philosopher thinks the relationship between the two is depends, in part, on the philosopher's view of logicLogicIn philosophy, Logic is the formal systematic study of the principles of valid inference and correct reasoning. Logic is used in most intellectual activities, but is studied primarily in the disciplines of philosophy, mathematics, semantics, and computer science...
). Some philosophers have held that discovered identities such as KripkeSaul KripkeSaul Aaron Kripke is an American philosopher and logician. He is a professor emeritus at Princeton and teaches as a Distinguished Professor of Philosophy at the CUNY Graduate Center...
's "Water is H2O" are metaphysically necessary but not logically necessary (they would claim that there is no formal contradiction involved in "Water is not H2O" even though it turns out to be metaphysically impossible).
- Nomological possibility is possibility under the actual laws of nature. Most philosophers since David HumeDavid HumeDavid Hume was a Scottish philosopher, historian, economist, and essayist, known especially for his philosophical empiricism and skepticism. He was one of the most important figures in the history of Western philosophy and the Scottish Enlightenment...
have held that the laws of nature are metaphysically contingent--that there could have been different natural laws than the ones that actually obtain. If so, then it would not be logically or metaphysically impossible, for example, for you to travel to Alpha CentauriAlpha CentauriAlpha Centauri is the brightest star in the southern constellation of Centaurus...
in one day; it would just have to be the case that you could travel faster than the speed of lightSpeed of lightThe speed of light in vacuum, usually denoted by c, is a physical constant important in many areas of physics. Its value is 299,792,458 metres per second, a figure that is exact since the length of the metre is defined from this constant and the international standard for time...
. But of course there is an important sense in which this is not possible; given that the laws of nature are what they are, there is no way that you could do it. (Some philosophers, such as Sydney ShoemakerSydney ShoemakerSydney Shoemaker is an American philosopher. Until his retirement, he was a Susan Linn Sage Professor of Philosophy at Cornell University. He holds a PhD from Cornell and BA from Reed. In 1971, he delivered the John Locke Lectures at Oxford University...
, have argued that natural laws are in fact necessary, not contingent; if so, then nomological possibility is equivalent to metaphysical possibility.)
- Temporal possibility is possibility given the actual history of the world. David Lewis could have chosen to take his degree in Accounting rather than Philosophy; but there is an important sense in which he cannot now. The "could have" expresses the fact that there is no logical, metaphysical, or even nomological impossibility involved in Lewis's having a degree in Economics instead of Philosophy; the "cannot now" expresses the fact that that possibility is no longer open to becoming actual, given that the past is as it actually is.
Similarly David Lewis could have taken a degree in Economics but not in, say, Aviation (because it was not taught at Harvard) or Cognitive Neuroscience (because the so-called 'conceptual space' for such a major did not exist). There is some debate whether this final type of possibility in fact constitutes a type of possibility distinct from Temporal, and is sometimes called Historical Possibility by thinkers like Ian Hacking
Ian Hacking
Ian Hacking, CC, FRSC, FBA is a Canadian philosopher, specializing in the philosophy of science.- Life and works :...
.