Abstract
Serious actualism is the view that it is metaphysically impossible for an entity to have a property, or stand in a relation, and not exist. Fine (1985) and Pollock (1985) influentially argue that this view is false. In short, there are properties like the property of nonexistence, and it is metaphysically possible that some entity both exemplifies such a property and does not exist. I argue that such arguments are indeed successful against the standard formulation of serious actualism. However, I also argue that we should distinguish a weaker formulation of serious actualism using the actualist distinction between truth in, and truth at, a possible world. This weaker formulation is then shown to be consistent with the existence and possible exemplification of properties like the property of nonexistence. I end with a novel argument for the truth of the weaker formulation.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 658-674 |
Number of pages | 17 |
Journal | Australasian Journal of Philosophy |
Volume | 102 |
Issue number | 3 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - 3 Mar 2024 |
Keywords
- Serious actualism
- Nonexistence
- World-relative truth
- Propositions
- Properties
- Modality