contingent vs. necessary truths Back to Last Page >Â Â Â Â Â
Glossary Index>
| |
 |
| Â |
Definition:
The distinction between contingent and necessary statements is one of the oldest in philosophy. A truth is necessary if denying it would entail a contradiction. A truth is contingent, however, if it happens to be true but could have been false. For example:
Cats are mammals.
Cats are reptiles.
Cats have claws.
The first statement is a necessary truth because denying it, as with the second statement, results in a contradiction. Cats are, by definition, mammals - so saying that they are reptiles is a contradiction. The third statement is a contingent truth becuase it is possible that cats could have evolved without claws.
This is similar to the distinction between essential and accidental qualities. Being a mammal is part of a cat's essence, but having claws is an accident.
Also Known As: none
Alternate Spellings: none
Common Misspellings: none
Related Resources:
What is the Logic and the Philosophy of Language?
The two fields Logic and the Philosophy of Language are often treated separately, but they are nevertheless close enough that they are presented together here. Logic is the study of methods of reasoning and argumentation, both proper and improper. The Philosophy of Language, on the other hand, involves the study of how our language interacts with our thinking.
What is Philosophy?
What is philosophy? Is there any point in studying philosophy, or is it a useless subject? What are the different branches of philosophy - what's the difference between aestheitcs and ethics? What's the difference between metaphysics and epistemology?
Back to Last Page >Â Â Â Â Â
Glossary Index>
No comments:
Post a Comment