Posted: Apr 05, 2011 8:52 pm
Paul Almond wrote:My own view would be that the set of possible worlds should be the set of all worlds which we do not know to be inconsistent with our knowledge - and I would actually admit logically inconsistent worlds into this set.
I think this is indeed the standard practise. Although there may be some formal details when you get into it (e.g. is a possible world where we guess pidig incorrectly inconsistent in a theory in which we have not embedded PA or some other suitable system).
It's this understanding of the set of possible worlds that would appear to justify modal intuition. However, when you start messing around with the definition of possible worlds any justification for intuition would seem to disappear.