Unformatted text preview: statement ( necessitas consequentiae ) with the necessity of the consequent of that statement ( necessitas consequentis ). Necessitas consequentiae Necessitas consequentis necessarily (if p , then q ) vs. if p then necessarily q ( p → q ) vs. p → q ( p → q ) may be true even though both p and q are contingent truths. Hence, it does not entail p → q . Example: Necessarily, if Tom’s shirt is crimson, then Tom’s shirt is red. (Being crimson entails being red.) But although Tom’s shirt is crimson, it is not a necessary truth that Tom’s shirt is red. The color of Tom’s shirt is a contingent matter. Cf. Parmenides’ treatment of the claim “what exists must exist.” This fallacy vitiates phase one of Plato’s argument: the argument that takes us from the truism that knowledge entails truth to the controversial thesis that what is known is a necessary truth....
View Full Document
This note was uploaded on 11/14/2011 for the course PHI PHI2010 taught by Professor Jorgerigol during the Fall '09 term at Broward College.
- Fall '09