This preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.
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 Toms shirt is crimson, then Toms shirt is red. (Being crimson entails being red.) But although Toms shirt is crimson, it is not a necessary truth that Toms shirt is red. The color of Toms shirt is a contingent matter. Cf. Parmenides treatment of the claim what exists must exist. This fallacy vitiates phase one of Platos 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
- Fall '09