Abstract
Williamson has claimed that we assess counterfactuals ‘If it were/had been that A, it would be/have been that C’ primarily using a combination of two heuristics, both inconsistent: one for the indicative ‘if’ – essentially, a Ramsey Test for indicatives; one for ‘would’. A better candidate for our primary way of assessing counterfactuals has been known for decades. Mathematical results guarantee that it doesn’t have certain troubles of the heuristics invoked by Williamson; on some ways of fine-tuning, it may even be rationally ideal. So calling it a ‘heuristic’ may be uncharitable.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Journal | Ergo |
| Publication status | Accepted/In press - 29 Jun 2025 |