How Does Modal Logic Interpret Possibility and Necessity?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Nim
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Logic
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the interpretation of possibility and necessity in modal logic, exploring how these concepts apply to statements and their truth across different possible worlds. Participants examine the implications of modal logic for mathematical statements and the contextual nature of possibility.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that "logically possible" refers to statements not ruled out by something that is true or logically necessary, suggesting that everything logically necessary is also logically possible.
  • One participant clarifies that a statement could be false in the actual world yet still be logically possible, emphasizing the importance of "true in all possible worlds."
  • Another participant discusses the contextual meaning of possibility, stating that it requires reference to a frame of worlds, where a proposition is considered possible if true in any accessible frame.
  • Regarding the statement "1 + 1 = 2," it is noted that its classification as possible or necessary depends on the defined accessible frame, with examples provided from normal decimal arithmetic and arithmetic modulo 2.
  • There is a suggestion that discussions around the philosophical implications of modal logic may lead to complications not permitted in the forum.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the definitions and implications of possibility and necessity in modal logic, indicating that multiple competing interpretations remain without consensus.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights limitations in definitions of accessible frames and the implications of different mathematical contexts on the interpretation of statements. There is also a noted tension between mathematical reasoning and philosophical considerations.

Nim
Messages
74
Reaction score
0
One of the ways we use the term possibility is "We can go to Mars". Another way is "We may learn how to travel to Mars faster than light as our understanding of physics progresses".

What exactly does it mean in modal logic? Would a statement like 1+1=2 be considered possible in modal logic or necessary or both?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Logically possible means not ruled out by something that is true or is logically necessary. Everything that is logically necessary is also logically possible.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Nim
I should have said "true in all possible worlds", rather than simply "true" -- a thing could be false in our world and still be logically possible.
 
Nim said:
One of the ways we use the term possibility is "We can go to Mars". Another way is "We may learn how to travel to Mars faster than light as our understanding of physics progresses".
Neither of those statements contains the term (or operator of) possibility. The first one is a simple statement of ability "We are able to go to Mars". The second does contain the notion of possibility and can be restated "It is possible for us to learn how to travel to Mars faster than light...".

Nim said:
What exactly does it mean in modal logic?
Possibility has no meaning on its own, it acquires meaning with reference to a frame of worlds. If a proposition is true in any frame that is accessible then it is possible.

Nim said:
Would a statement like 1+1=2 be considered possible in modal logic or necessary or both?
That depends on how you define the accessible frame. If the frame includes normal decimal arithmetic then the statement is clearly possible so the modal proposition "it is possible that 1 + 1 = 2" is true in that model. If the frame includes arithmetic modulo 2 then the modal proposition "it is possible that not (1 + 1 = 2)" is true, which in most formulations of modal logic implies that the proposition "it is necessary that 1 + 1 = 2" is false. Of course one could argue that 2 is not a value of arithmetic modulo 2 and so the proposition has no meaning in that world, but then you are in danger of straying into philosophy which is
  • where, in my (limited) experience, modal logic usually ends up
  • not allowed on Physics Forums.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
9K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
5K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
6K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
3K
  • · Replies 45 ·
2
Replies
45
Views
6K
  • · Replies 109 ·
4
Replies
109
Views
11K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K