You are on page 1of 10
13 «a Three Grades of Modal Involvement ‘There are several costly interrelated operator, called modal operator, wish are eacactarati f wal lg, Phare ar tho operators of neczsity, porbity, impoorbity, now-necersiy, Alo there are the Bary operntony er connectives, of etic, implication aud srt equivalence Tes various operators are fully definable in terms of ono another. Thus impossibility ie neceatity of the negation; possiblity and non-novesity ae the negations of impossibility and neeeity; and striotSmplienion fd alectequivalenoo are necessity of the material conditional ‘nd Bicnditioal. In philosophical examination of modal logic We muy therefore conveniantly Init ouslves for dhe most park to a single medal operator, that of nacasy. Whstever may be sid about noeeity mey be tld alo, with easy and obvious sdjusinents, about the ther modes, ‘Thor sve three dierent deyros to which we may allow loge or eemaatcs, to embraoe tho idea of nowy. The fe ot least dogree of acceptance Is this: nacearty i exposed by somantical predicate sttrbutable to statnents se notational forme—ende attachable to nasnet of statements, We mite, rom the rouge of he XIEh Internal Coron of Pia, rami Votan Ie (Azar Nar ond Aline Ge ® Nee'@> 8, ® ‘Nec (Burm ores), ® [Nee ‘Napoleon esesped from Elta’, ‘in oach ene attaching the prodicte ‘Ne’ to » noun a singul term, whichis namo ofthe statement which i eiemed t bo necesary (or neeesarly te). Of the above example, (1) and (2) would precumubly be regarded oe true and (8) a8 false; fr the neeesity eoxcerned in medal lgi i generally conetved to ‘be ofa logical ora prin ant ‘A seoond and more east degree in which the notion of noocaty many be alte ein the frm of 4 aatemant operator Here we have no longer a prodiests, attaching to names of ftatemente sein (1)=(3), bub t loll operator ‘ee, whieh s faces to statements themeelver, n the manne of the nogstion gn. Under this usage, (1) and (8) would be rendered rather as: ® neo (9> 8), 6 ‘ee (Napatean cape from Fibs), sand (2) would be rendered by prefiing ‘oe’ to Storm's actutt ttorem Tater than to its name, ‘Thor ‘whwneas ‘Nec is a predate or verb, Hn neceary’, which attaches toa own to frm 4 statment, “noe” ie rather an adverb, ‘cea, which uaches to eatoment to form a statement, ually the third and gravest degra 's eqresion of necesity| by a seatence operator This san extension ofthe eeoond deere, ad goet beyond it in allowing the ltachment of se! nat oaly #9 Statements but alto to open semtenoes, uch ne ‘x > 8 prepara tory to theultimate sttacimen of quale © () me (2 > 8), o 2) neo (2 > 8), ® (le = 9.3 noe (> BI ‘The example (8) would doubts berated a8 fake, and perhaps (2) and (8) as true. thal be eongerned in thie paper to bring out the logieal and hilsophielsignifennoe of thee tive degree of acoptanse of necenty device, 18 The Ways of Parade 1 “al an srurense of singular tenn in statement purely referents (Preps: gerade), il, roughly speaking te tem Server in tat patsle coment inly to reer bjt Ocrureen within question ae tot ge the teanena ® “Ge? conan i eter (10) "9 > 6 ental jut thre ehratrs sy things th ata Co te umber 8 ge rerio fr vforentaecarence is rbueiiy of Ident ‘Since * * ay Tay = Gir, w the amber of planets = whatever trv of Cicer is uu acta of Tuy there being xe andthe sae) aad whatover er a ito the mune of plant It by puting Tul for “Cer oF the wamber of planet for in rth eg, (0) (0), we some out with cht: ay "Tully? contains eters (04) “the numberof planets > 5 ont just hres characters, we may be sure thatthe position on which the eubstivtion war tnade wae not purely referential, (@) must nt be eonused with as) (Gee basa siltter ain, Which dee say something about the man Cicero, and—uaike (2) ermine true whan the name Ciceo'is supplanted by "Tully Talking s int fram Issel” we may spec of & context se referential opaque whea, by putting statement 4 into that fantent we eet cuss a purely referential accurreses in to be ‘ot purely seferenial ie he whole context, Ing, the context “1. eoutsins jst the caractars epi ears mn is referential opaque; for, the occurrence of "in '9> 8? ie ely referential bt the aesrence of in (10) ie nok Biel, context i relerentally opaque if it ean render a referent ‘vourengenon-teferet, ‘Quotation is the relerentilly opaque context per exellenee. Intuitively, what ceaurs inside a referentially opaque context ray be leoke! upon as an ortogzaphicacedent, witout logia atu, ike the oowarrence of "eat in ‘atl’. The quotations eontext 9 > 8°” of the statement ‘> 8 hao, parheps, unlike the conlent ‘cattle’ of "at, w deceptively eyremasie sir whieh tempi us to think of its parte ae somehow logically germane Insofar as this temptation exist, itis salutary to paraphrase ‘quotations by the following expedient, We ray adopt aazaze for ech of our leery and other characters, end Tae "to exe pres oeatenstion Then, istend of naming a otatinal form ly putting tht notational form itself body batwoen quotation rr, wean name i by spalling it. Eig, since‘ emu, “is ‘cull, abd je my the word ‘pe’ ieuopalon” nu, Siar the staiement'@ > 8 is nrg if we adopt Une leters‘g and ‘ot nase ofthe eharectere,">', and 5. "The example (10) can thn be tranerbed co) ef contains just Uv characters, Here thee is no xon-rferntaloreurence ofthe numeral ‘for there is no occurence of al; and har there i 20 referentaly fpacue containment of one statement by another, becsure the {Sa contined statement e all. Perapesing (10) into (10), «0 fe to got id altogotter of the opanuely conve! statement 'B > 8 elke paraphrasing eat into ‘ine’ 20 ae toi i of the merely orthographic coeurrence of tho term ‘cal. Neither Pwraphiuat is mandatory, but both are bell when the iefor tin oourrenes draw unde attention ‘An oourrence of statement a a pert of a Jonger statement x call truthfunctonal if, whenever we supplant the conained ftatement by another statment having the se tuth value the ontining satemen, remains unchanged in trath value, Nato- rally one, would not expect oreuzencet of tatements within Teferentnlly opaque sonterte, such az quotations, Zo bo teuth- Fanetioal. ig, the teu (10) becomes fale when the contained statement “0 >is supplanted by soother, ‘Napoleon eeaped aoe The Ways of Parades from Elbe, whith hus th eame truth value as ‘9. Agsin the ‘uth (1) i carried, ky that sume sbstittion, into the fleehood 2). One might not expect ooeurences of daterents within fatements to be tath-fanetional, in general, even when the contests are aot referetilly opsaue; certainly not when the context ae reerentalyopacue In mathexutice logis, however «policy of extensionalty ix idely espoused: poiey of admitting statements within tate. ments trut-functionally only (apart of cures from such con texts as quotation, whch are referential opaque). Note thatthe ‘ecnantialpreivate ‘Noe’ as of (1)-(2) is tecoelabl with thie Paliey of extensioalty, since whatever breach of entensonslity it prima facie involves i shared by examplee like (10) and atulbutable to the relerentil opselty of quotation, We ea always amit to the spalling expen, tus rewriting (2) an Ne 00. (20, ike (16) nd indeed (2) sed unlike (2) asd (2), contains ‘bo component statement but only a uate of tema, ‘Tha sistemeat operat ne’, on the ether hand, o premed= {sted departare from extensionlity, The onurrnce of the truth '9> Bim (4) ie non-truth-funetiona, sine by eaplaatng it by dierent truth we ean turn the true content (4) into falsehood suth 2 (5) Such oonurrences, moreover, are nt locked upon as sonchow spurious or irrelevant to logieal structure, tke secre ences in quotation or like ‘eat’ in eat. On the contrary, the ‘modal log pied in (4) i usualy put forward a eneective of extensionsey, « needed eupplementetion of an ethernise limpoverised lg. TeuthTunetionsloceurrenee is by uo eens the rule in ordinary language, ae witnees oceurreaces of ste. munis governed by "Deoaue, thinks tha iss thet a8 ‘well as ‘necessarily’, Moda logicans, adopting ‘oe, have seen ‘0 reason to sappoe that an adequate logic aght adhere to « policy of extensontity Bu forall the willingness of mal logicians to flout the Bolicy of extensioalty, is there zelly any diference—on the score of extensionity—between thet statement operator ‘ace and the exteasonally- quits adiinible eemeatia! predicate ‘Neo? The Iter was excusable, within a polly of extensional: ity, by cing the referential opacity of quotation, But te tatenctoperstr ‘eis Hkeviteexstbl, within «poi of ‘enfenaiy,byctng ths retrial pay ofc! teal To Sn deter! acy of nes we be only to ot tht (0 Qe (a) arotaeand yt ini fae: os) nee (the number of planets > 5), Pe daemet pie tv earn caret ce ar ey i thc el hee Recreate eee a ean cen a ey iaihay Sry pret dates, bns tse ab (8 arf eam beer ape Bimalgense her one tase reece aimee ieee ee neato ial ser Aaa ts, by the above considerations, lepally equivalent to‘. Than, Shoe ‘Fp! ie tue end logial equvalnts are interchanges ‘within this wl be true aa) Rule = 4.9) a