[lit-ideas] Re: Are all logical possibilities a result of some kind of logica...
- From: Jlsperanza@xxxxxxx
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 1 May 2009 07:35:20 EDT
In a message dated 4/29/2009 7:21:38 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
donalmcevoyuk@xxxxxxxxxxx writes:
And, if so, is this right or wrong?
And, if not, how do we explain away certain statements therein?
Personally, I work with a square:
The square of opposition as applied to modalities:
A (NEC) E (not nec)
I (POSS) O (IMPOSS)
So, nec. and poss. are _reciprocal_. We _can_ say one is a result of the
other. In fact, they _are_ interdefinable.
People _think_ that the concept of 'necessity' is more _serious_ than the
concept of _possibility_, but you cannot have one without the other.
As for the statements that derive from this, further illustration welcome.
JLS
**************Access 350+ FREE radio stations anytime from anywhere on the
web. Get the Radio Toolbar!
(http://toolbar.aol.com/aolradio/download.html?ncid=emlcntusdown00000003)
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
