The Dual Detector Argument against the Modal Theory
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 21311461 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Dan Marshall (0000-0002-5763-3875, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2022 |
| Volume | 76 |
| Issue | 4 |
| Pages | 597-621 |
| Publication date | 2022-01-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | dialectica (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0012-2017 • E-ISSN: 1746-8361 |
| Publisher | Verein philosophie.ch (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.48106/dial.v76.i4.04 |
| OpenAlex | W4414752683 |
| Language | EN |
The modal theory holds that facts (properties) are identical iff they are necessarily equivalent (coextensive). One of the most prominent arguments against the modal theory is Elliot Sober’s dual-detector argument. According to this argument, the fact that some particular thing is a triangle is distinct from the necessarily equivalent fact that it is a trilateral, since it is only the former fact that causes an output of a certain machine. I argue that the dual-detector argument fails, in part because whatever initial plausibility it has relies on the failure to take into consideration a needed relativisation to times and the failure to distinguish between two facts collectively causing a fact and their conjunction singly causing it. I also argue that variants of the argument are equally unsuccessful
Argument (complex analysis) · Calculus (dental) · Conjunction (astronomy) · Dual (grammatical number) · Modal · Possible world · Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics · Philosophy and Theoretical Science · Space Science and Extraterrestrial Life
| Citation velocity | historical |
|---|---|
| Highly cited | No |