PhilArchive
open access
Strong vs Weak Necessitarianism: An Avicennian Defense of The Principle of Sufficient Reason
One common objection against the Principle of Sufficient Reason is that it leads to a highly counterintuitive position, namely, necessitarianism. In this paper, drawing on Avicenna’s modal theory, I differentiate between two versions of necessitarianism: strong necessitarianism and weak necessitarianism. I argue that the modal intuition driving this objection pertains to strong necessitarianism, while the Principle of Sufficient Reason, at most, leads to weak necessitarianism.
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- A Theory of Necessities#697406
- "Understanding the Demandingness Objection"#769362
- Natural Properties Do Not Support Essentialism in Counterpart Theory: A Reflection on Buras’s Proposal#697038
- Potentiality as "It Depends": a Methodology on the Invariantial Binary Authorization of Host Platforms, With an Application to Infinite Regress#690272
- Nāgārjuna and Vasubandhu on the principle of sufficient reason#722926
Record · ID 732034
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive