Sliding from possible worlds semantics to truth

Relativism and strong forms of contextualism assert, from what I gather, that the content of a proposition is not true or false simpliciter, but rather true or false at a time/world/context. A motivation for accepting semantic relativism is the success of possible worlds semantics. It becomes easy to make the move from thinking about possible worlds semantics (specifically, what is true at some possible world) to what is true in the actual world. Quite obviously, there is an underlying assumption here that many find it reasonable to deny: that truthmaker theory of some sort is correct.

If you deny the truthmaker theory for, say, Trenton Merricks’ TSB (truth supervenes on being) account, this slide is wholly illegitimate. Perhaps the truth of a proposition is found in it’s constituent parts or a combination of those parts (the proposition) and not in relation to a possible world. One has a good defeater for analytic relativism if you deny that the truth of a proposition is dependent on a relation to a possible world.

Advertisements

GFP reading group

The paper is here; the discussion is over here.
I’ll be in St. Louis for the next few days (I’m pro-dating this post), so I’ll try to add some of my thoughts when I get back. Well, as long as I have any 🙂

GFP’s reading group

GFP is one of the premier philosophical stops on the internet, and hands down the single best discussion of free will on the web. They’ve kick-started their reading group with a piece by Mark Balaguer (you can find it here). Some rules:

Y’all will remember the format: a paper gets posted for your reading pleasure, then a commentator, well, comments, and finally we have a free-for-all careful discussion open to all.

[…]

Here’s here things will unfold. On June 9 I will post Mark’s paper (if you’re keen, you can find it yourself beforehand); within a week of that date I will post my comments and Mark’s response. Then we shall proceed in an orderly fashion to rip Mark to pieces offer constructive criticism.

The paper looks interesting and I plan to keep my blog updated with the discussion that takes place there.