Hyperintensionality and Normativity

247 Pages·2019·3.375 MB·English

by  Federico L. G. Faroldi

Federico L. G. Faroldi
Hyperintensionality
and Normativity
Hyperintensionality and Normativity
Federico L. G. Faroldi
Hyperintensionality
and Normativity
123
Federico L.G.Faroldi
CentreforLogicandPhilosophyofScience
Research Foundation—Flanders(FWO)
GhentUniversity
Ghent, Belgium
ISBN978-3-030-03486-3 ISBN978-3-030-03487-0 (eBook)
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-03487-0
LibraryofCongressControlNumber:2019930575
©SpringerNatureSwitzerlandAG2019
Thisworkissubjecttocopyright.AllrightsarereservedbythePublisher,whetherthewholeorpart
of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations,
recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission
orinformationstorageandretrieval,electronicadaptation,computersoftware,orbysimilarordissimilar
methodologynowknownorhereafterdeveloped.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this
publicationdoesnotimply,evenintheabsenceofaspecificstatement,thatsuchnamesareexemptfrom
therelevantprotectivelawsandregulationsandthereforefreeforgeneraluse.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this
book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the
authorsortheeditorsgiveawarranty,expressorimplied,withrespecttothematerialcontainedhereinor
for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to
jurisdictionalclaimsinpublishedmapsandinstitutionalaffiliations.
ThisSpringerimprintispublishedbytheregisteredcompanySpringerNatureSwitzerlandAG
Theregisteredcompanyaddressis:Gewerbestrasse11,6330Cham,Switzerland
Nothing without an end is complete; but the
end is a limit.
Aristotle, Physics, book III, 207a, 14–15.
A papà e mamma
Acknowledgements
Writingacknowledgementsisbothasweetandasourendeavor:sweet,becausefew
things give me more pleasure than philosophical discussions, and being reminded
of them revamps the pleasure; sour, because it means that a season of one’s
intellectuallifehascometoanend,andmanyfellowtravelerswillnomorebewith
me.
I wish to thank Pierluigi Minari, for his help, patience, and suggestions in all
these years. For reading and commenting in detail all or some parts of this work
over the years, I thank Justin Snedegar, Ralf Bader, and Kit Fine, who also sup-
portedmyresearchstaysinStAndrews,Oxford,andNewYork,respectively.Lou
GoubleandMalteWillerprovidedextensivecommentstoapreviousversionofthis
manuscript.InFlorence,AndreaCantini,GiovannaCorsi,SergioBernini,Riccardo
Bruni, andMarco Maggesialso discussed parts of this work with me and gaveme
valuable suggestions. Sergei Artemov has been very helpful in New York and
during my Ph.D. defense in providing criticism and ideas.
Guglielmo Feis has been a constant fellow traveler and a sound friend. My
coauthorsTudorProtopopescu,AlbertAnglberger,andJohannesKorbmacherhave
sharedmanywalkswithmedownthestreetsofManhattan,theforestsinGermany
or the Red Square. They have been a model and source of inspiration.
First, my colleagues in Pisa and Florence: Chiara Beneduce, Matteo Bensi,
MattiaDellaRocca,FabioFossa,CarlaGarbarino,AnnaRomani,DeniseVincenti,
andthenmycolleaguesinthelogicandphilosophyofsciencegroupatGhent:Joke
Meheus, Erik Weber, Frederik Van De Putte, Julie Mennes, Pawel Pawlowski,
Rafal Urbaniak, Stef Frijters, Mathieu Beirlaen, and Nathan Wood: thanks for
sharingallkindsofinterestingadventures,inthepastandhopefullyforthefutureas
well.
Thanks to people in Arché—St. Andrews, my office mate Matt McKeever,
BrunoJacinto,DerekBall,AaronCotnoir,andHasenKhudairi.Theymademefeel
welcomed and created for me a congenial work environment.
ix
x Acknowledgements
Thanks to friends and colleagues in Oxford: Peter Fritz, Lorenzo Rossi, Jeremy
Goodman, Beau Mount, Ralf Bader, and Osvaldo Ottaviani. Volker Halbach
wonderfully supported my visit in more than one way.
Philosophers, colleagues, and friends in New York: Natalia Karczewska,
Andreas Ditter, Andrés Soria Ruiz, Matheus Valente, Giulia Crisanti, Margherita
Mazza,TudorProtopopescu,SergeiArtemov,MelFitting,DaveChalmers,Harvey
Lederman, Heim Gaifman, Nicola Piras, and Friederike Moltmann.
Thanks to philosophers, colleagues, and friends in Paris: Bianca Cepollaro,
Filippo Contesi, Enrico Terrone, Manuel Križ, Paul Egré, and Giorgia Murgia.
Thanks to people I’ve been in correspondence with, or I met in various parts
oftheworldovertheyearstowhomItalkedaboutsomeoftheideaspursuedinthis
work, in no particular order: Olivier Roy, Lou Goble, Tim Williamson, Nino
Rotolo, Bjørn Jespersen, Paul MacNamara, Magdalena Kaufmann, Carl Pollard,
Derek Lam, Michael Klenk, Marie Duži, Allard Tamminga, Chris Fox, Malte
Willer, Stefano Predelli, Eugenio Orlandelli, Alessandra Marra, Stephan
Luenbergen, Levin Hornischer, Paul Portner, Thomas Ferguson, Alessandro
Giordani, Ilaria Canavotto, Carles Nogueira, Igor Sedlar, Ed Mares, Mel Fitting,
Franz Berto. For providing early drafts: Mark Jago, Matthew Chrisman, Dan
Lassiter, Lou Goble, Sam Walsh, and Tim Button. Many thanks also to those I
forgot to mention.
Many thanks to Arché, at the University of St Andrews, for being an excellent
place to do philosophy and for welcoming me in their family in 2014. Oxford has
been a fantastic place to learn and discuss during my time there in 2015.
ManythankstoallthefolksatNYU,myhomeawayfromhome,forhavingme
for a long time. Columbia and CUNY let me audit their courses and steal time to
their faculty and grad students.
TheInstitutJeanNicodoftheÉcoleNormaleSupérieurewasawonderfulplace
to be as well.
Almost all this work have been discussed, often multiple times, in several parts
of the worlds. Many thanks to audiences in Pavia, St Andrews, Delft, Florence,
NewYork,Milan,Bayreuth,Uppsala,Bologna,Bochum,York,Lublin,Bratislava,
and Canton. The group of S. Alberto, and notably Giampaolo Azzoni, Stefano
Colloca, Paolo Di Lucia, Giuseppe Lorini, and Lorenzo Passerini have heard me
ramblingaboutdifferenttopicsatvariousstagesofdevelopmentformoreyearsthan
I care to remember. Luca Fonnesu, Sergio Filippo Magni, and Tommaso Piazza
made sure I would get a healthy dose of criticism from the very beginning of my
academiccareer.AlessandroPorcarihasbeenthereallthetimesIcomplainedabout
everything,butmostlyaboutacademicphilosophy.AlbertoBardihasbeenafellow
travelerformoreyearsthanIcaretoremember,but,aboveall,hasbeenafriendfor
exactlytheyearsIcaretoremember.AmedeoG.Conte,migliorfabbro,shapedthe
way I think and I seek truth: no further words are needed.
ItgoeswithoutsayingthatwhileItakeallthecreditifsomethingturnsouttobe
intelligent, all the mistakes ought to be attributed to the people named above.
Acknowledgements xi
Partial funding for this work is acknowledged to the Italian Ministry for
Research and to the Research Foundation—Flanders for grant FWO17/PDO/193
intended to fund my project Fine-grained Logics for Normative Reasoning.
I have no wor(l)ds to express how Julie brings happiness into my life and how
she inspires me to be a better person and a better researcher. Thank you.
My parents, Stefano and Emanuela, have been a constant source of inspiration
andspurreddebateaboutalmosteverythingalmostalways,evenwhenIwasbarely
talking: I attribute my philosophical inclination to them. They also selflessly
encouragedmypursuitofknowledgeineveryway.Thisworkisdedicatedtothem.
Grazie di tutto.
Contents
Part I Deontic Modality: Intensional Logic, Semantics, and Beyond
1 Intensional Logic and Semantics for Deontic Modals . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.2 Kripke-Kratzer Logic and Semantics for Deontic Modals . . . . . . . 5
1.2.1 The Basics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.2.2 Standard Deontic Logic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
1.2.3 Kratzer’s Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
1.2.4 Scott-Montague Semantics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
1.3 Problems and Paradoxes for Classical Semantics and SDL . . . . . . 14
1.3.1 Problems and Paradoxes in the Logic Literature . . . . . . . . 14
1.3.2 Problems Highlighted in the Linguistic Literature . . . . . . . 20
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
Part II Hyperintensionality
2 A Primer on Hyperintensionality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
2.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
2.2 Extensionality Versus Intensionality Versus
Hyperintensionality. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
2.2.1 Extensionality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
2.2.2 Intensionality. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
2.2.3 Hyperintensionality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
2.3 Current Approaches to Hyperintensionality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
2.3.1 The Semantical Approach to Hyperintensionality. . . . . . . . 43
2.3.2 The Logical Approach to Hyperintensionality . . . . . . . . . . 48
2.3.3 The Metaphysical Approach to Hyperintensionality . . . . . . 51
2.4 How Theories Fare and a Look Ahead . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
xiii