In hardline classical theory matters deteriorate still further, through assumption of a one world modelling; that the only world, or at least the only world that matters logically, is the actual world… This is backed up by familiar propaganda about logic requiring a robust sense of reality and the like. In fact it doesn’t; and shouldn’t.

from “What is that Item Designated Negation?” in Gabbay & Wansing, (eds.) What is Negation? (1999), p.307

(HT: Feminist Philosophers)

“You can apply under the highly skilled worker category now if you are:”

After which a number of bullet points, the last of which is below.

“applying for permission to enter the United Kingdom (known as ‘entry clearance’) under the highly skilled worker category.”

Helpful, no?

There is an intuitive parity between underdetermination and overdetermination with respect to a given [sentence]. This parity is wrecked by the paradoxes of implication. Overdetermination — [inconsistency] — triggers classically a psychotic break. Underdetermination — incompleteness – is by contrast relatively painless.”

Robert K. Meyer, Entailment (1971)

Define a standard propositional language on signature . Possibility in the broadest sense is equivalent to being true in some “broadly” possible world where such a world is the sentence is true in iff . In other words, this is a highly elegant, simplistic, liberal, combinatorial conception of possibility in the broadest sense. Every set of sentences constitutes a possible world; what is possible is what is true in any such world. So what would be the compelling objections to this proposal?