David Lewis VaDiga < DVaga (Barcan’s principle) ‘The translation is nota theorem, but would have bbeen under the rejected postulate that, for any £0 worlds, snythingin one was a counterpart of some thing, in the other. SaLde < DStda ‘The translation isnot a theorem, but would have ‘been under the rejected postulate that, for any two ‘worlds, anything in one had some counterpart in the other. veda 4 VaLige (Converse of Barcan’s principle) "The translation is a theorem, Sade < aed ‘The translation isnot a theorem, nor would it have been under any extra postulates with even the slightest plausibiiy V. Relative Modalities Just as a sentence ¢ is necessary it holds in all ‘worlds, so @ is causally necessary if t holds in all worlds compatible withthe lews of nature; oblign~ tory for you iit holds inal worlds in which you act rightly; implicily known, believed, hoped, aserted, or perceived by youifit holdsin all worlds ‘compatible with the costent of your knowledge, beliefs, hopes, assertions, or perceptions. These, and many more, are relative modalities, expressible by quantifications over restricted ranges of worlds ‘Ween write any dual pair of relative modalities as 5)... 5, Ode where the index i indicates how the restriction of worlds is to be made and the m arguments Big +4 Sq, with m > 0, denote things €0 be con sidered in making the restriction (52, the person whose implicit knowledge we are talking about). ‘To every dual. pair of relative modalities there corresponds a characteristic relation am (world = is related ro world y +4 therein) Rixyey and 21: eD sovemed by the postulate DIVAN Wey Veg( Ri ot DI Wy & Ieny & «, & leg) ‘The characteristic relation gives the appropriate restriction: we ar to consider ony worlds cated to whatever word we are in (and certain things in i. Necessity and possibilty themselves are chat pair of relative modalities whose characteristic relation is just, the 2place universal relation benween worlds ‘We can easly extend oor translation scheme to handle sentences containing miscellaneous modal ‘operators. We will teat them just as we do neces- sity and possibilty, except that quantifiers over worlds wil range over ony hose works which bear the appropriate characteristic relation 10 some world and perhaps some things in it. ‘The translation of ¢ remains @; we need only add two. new clauses to the recursive definition of Tat (CY. Syd a) PYBIN VRP BBs Be be Py & Cra Ho BIB, & Cyt 2 tet) TH (O15. -Sydas a) is BPAY « 2rs(R BABB by be FrBy & Cray Boos WIIgBy & Crete & ON --- Te) (since necessity and possibility are relative modal- ities, we no longer need T2i and 12). For example our translations of oe D5pa cinree where ¢ is 2 O-place sentence, y is a I-place sentence, [! is a L-place relative modality, and isa Loplace relative modality, are, respectively, a(R pa > 6°) (@ holds in any world érelted to the set world) VBWy(R BOS & Lyf & Cya.d Wa) (holds ofany counterpart of in any work B jelatd to the actual world and 5 herein)