1 of 1- Dennis
- Member
Offline - Registered: 6/26/2015
- Posts: 348
John Heil and Contingency
In his paper Contingency, John Heil asks us to imagine a possible world where there are no objects whatsoever, quickly, if there are no objects, then in what sense is this a world?
I'm assuming Heil takes the world to be a sum of everything that exists. I agree that it would be infelicitous to say that there is such a possible world. But this doesn't seem right to me, surely the question "Why is there something rather than nothing?" asks us to consider the very possibility that no objects exist, and that would entail that no possibilities, and thus no actual or possible world existing could be a live possibility.
Thoughts?
- DanielCC
- Administrator
Offline
- Registered: 6/26/2015
- Posts: 765
Re: John Heil and Contingency
The better question is: how did there come to be contingent beings in the first place? Even if we put aside the question of necessary concrete beings, those who ask it typicaly don't mean to include objects like abstracta.
For a full book on the subject, albeit one which jejune on the subject of necessary beings, I'd recommend Geraldine Coggins' Could There Have Been Nothing?: Against Metaphysical Nihilism (which, in the interests of random biography, was first read by yours truly whilst huddled in a tent in a storm at a festival).
Last edited by DanielCC (5/13/2017 10:22 am)
- Dennis
- Member
Offline
- Registered: 6/26/2015
- Posts: 348
Re: John Heil and Contingency
My fear is that I that the possible worlds semantics might not be able to entertain the question, and thus there would be a charge of un-intelligibility. But this is one of the few questions that has always made me wonder about, and postulate God. The book you've recommended is something I've been after for such a long time!! I'll order it in a week's time, thanks!!!
Last edited by Dennis (5/14/2017 10:28 am)
- •
Thread Starter- DanielCC
- Administrator
Offline
- Registered: 6/26/2015
- Posts: 765
Re: John Heil and Contingency
Dennis wrote:
My fear is that I that the possible worlds semantics might not be able to entertain the question, and thus there would be a charge of un-intelligibility.
Well this is the famous problem of counter-possibles which leads people to explore the notion of 'impossible worlds' isn't it?
- Dennis
- Member
Offline
- Registered: 6/26/2015
- Posts: 348
Re: John Heil and Contingency
I see, I didn't know about that, I thought that there was plenty of room for work, and I never really bothered to check out the "impossible-worlds" in full since I didn't need it, but it seems that I'll have to do that now.
- •
Thread Starter