Contrafácticos: ¿una dieta limitada de ejemplos?

Abstract

The justification for alternative calculi based on particular cases that seem to conflict with the truth-table of the standard conditional is here analyzed. We advocate a more thorough examination of oft-repeated examples and a search for different kinds of new ones. Leibniz’s interpretation of legal statements as probable hypotheticals is mentioned as a model for the type of work proposed in this paper. Although several kinds of conditionals are usually distinguished in logic textbooks, counterfactuals are almost always placed together as a single category. We propose here that several kinds of counterfactuals can be distinguished from a logical perspective; some of them are mentioned.